Teaching
and Learning of Idiomatic Expressions and Multi-word Verbs of English in The Context
of Sudan CHAPTER - 2 REVIEW OF LITERATURE 2.1 INTRODUCTION In carrying out this literature search for relevant background
material, the researcher has consulted as many sources as possible.
I reviewed some of salient points of previous works on or around idiomatic
expressions and multi-word verbs of English.
In this chapter, we shall look at some of the more important predecessors
to see how idiomatic expressions and multi-word verbs have been defined, discussed,
taught and learnt in the past and the recent period so as to have an insight about
the acquired knowledge to apply it in solving and eliminating the problems and
difficulties of teaching and learning these two language components in the context
of Sudan.
However, I combed diligently and reviewed a considerable number of relevant
references as well as a brief comparison between six of the most comprehensive,
systematic and standard publications closely related to our topic. These are namely: ·
Oxford Dictionary of English Idioms ·
Oxford Dictionary of Phrasal Verbs ·
Collins COBUILD Dictionary of Idioms ·
Collins COBUILD Dictionary of Phrasal Verbs ·
Cambridge International Dictionary of Idioms and ·
Cambridge International Dictionary of Phrasal Verbs.
The reader will notice the concentration on these pairs of dictionaries,
in this review as the result of the awareness of the fact that idiomaticity is
largely a semantic bearing (dealing with definitions, meanings, collocation etc.) and at the same time bearing in mind the nature
of multi-word verbs which is a vocabulary matter rather than a syntax one or other
i.e., its treatment is mainly found in dictionaries as well as other vocabulary
lists, data base (word banks) etc.
In sum, the works reviewed here, will make a considerable and valuable
contribution in any relevant since they defined, discussed and treated these special
expressions in great detail. It need not
be stated again that their role is enormous (despite their variations in scope,
detail, perceptiveness and underlying philosophy) in teaching and learning these
two language components. 2.2 THE
INDIAN GRAMMARIANS
The problem of idioms is as old as Linguistics itself. The principle of ‘compositionality’ of meaning, central to any consideration
of idiom, was debated for some 1300 years by those highly perceptive and methodical
precursors of modern linguistics, the Sanskrit grammarians:
‘The Padavādins, or Bhā¶¶a school of the later MīmāÆsā regarded ‘padas’ (inflected words)
as the significant parts of a sentence and interpreted the sense of a sentence
as the composite or united meaning of the ‘padas’ that go to constitute it’.
(Chakravarti : 1933:12)
They were routed, however, by the Vakyāvādins (vāk = speech,
the word) of the Prābhākara school.
Bhart¤hari,
expounding this position, argued that just as letters cannot be divided into small
parts, so words are not divisible into letters nor sentences into words.
Words may be analysed into stem and formative, and sentences into separate
words, according to the principle of apoddhāra (disintegration); but this
device although useful is unreal.
‘A clear line is drawn between the sentence and its so-called constituents
(padas)… the sense conveyed by a sentence is also indivisible. Just as a word (sabdaspho¶a) or a sentence
does not really consist of any parts, so the meaning denoted by it does not admit
of any division… ‘Indivisibility’ is thus a peculiar characteristic that equally
applies to both the sentence and its meaning’. (Chakravarti
1933:110-1)
A specific example of Indian linguists discussion of multi-words verbs
involves the status of ‘verbal prefixes’. Upasargas
(‘prepositions’) were generally agreed to be indicative (dyotaka) rather than
denotative (vācaka), that is, they serve to specialize the more general meanings
of verbs and nouns. Pā¸ini (5th
Century BC) recognized them as independently significant. His view was elaborated by others who claimed
that they have particular meanings, and that their main function is to specialize
the meanings of the nouns and verbs to which they are attached.
Patānjali (2nd century BC), however, asserted that verbal
roots carry a range of meanings in themselves and that prepositio0ns have no particular
meanings to contribute. Bhart¤hari (8th
century AD) defended the Pā¸inian position; but eventually Pu¸yarāja resolved the debate by concluding that
‘In cases of verbs joined with prepositions the meaning is derived usually
from a harmonious combination of dhātu (verb stem) and upasarga and not from
any one of them separately’. (Chakravarti
1933:171)
However, from the above quotations and the discussion, we can conclude
that the concepts of ‘idiomaticity’ and ‘multiplicity’ of the words (in verbal
combinations): Creations of new verbal
combinations by adding prepositions (upasargas) were dealt with by Indian grammarians
long ago. Also, it is worth mentioning
that the crucial problem of compositionality is fully and carefully debated, and
many valuable observations were made. 2.3
LOGAN PEARSALL SMITH 1925
In this review, we shall now turn to Logan Pearsall Smith, Lexicographer
and member of the Society for Pure English, whose 1925 book Words and Idioms includes
a 125 – page chapter on ‘English Idioms’. He
defines idioms as:
The idiosyncrasies of our language, and, above all, those phrases which
are verbal anomalies, which transgress, that is to say, either the laws of grammar
or the laws of logic. (Smith
1925:168)
Smith had developed and explained the above statement allowing that compound
words could be idioms. Words could be
idioms. The high incidence of oddity in the use of
prepositions was noted by him. He also
distinguished grammatical from semantic anomaly; but the chief focus of his essay
lies in its lists of hundreds of English ‘idioms’, all phrasal and most figurative,
classified according to their original semantic field.
The appendix of ‘Semantic Idioms’ alone gives over 500 expressions derived
from parts of the body: to keep one’s head, to live hand to mouth, etc. Smith provides a valuable corpus for the idiomatologist
to draw on. 2.4 CHARLES HOCKETT 1958
Hockett in his 1958 “Course in Modern Linguistics” is the first of the
modern western grammarians to give serious consideration to the definitions of
idiom and its consequences. His discussion
is worth quoting at length:
‘Let us momentarily use the term ‘Y’ for any grammatical form the meaning
of which is not deducible from its structure.
Any ‘Y’ in any occurrence in which it is not a constituent of a larger
‘Y’, is an idiom. A vast number of composite
forms in any language are idioms. If we
are to be consistent in our use of the definition, we are forced also to grant
every morpheme idiomatic status, save when it is occurring as a constituent of
a larger idiom, since a morpheme has no structure from which its meaning could
be deduced.
The advantage of this feature of our definition, and of the inclusion of
morphemes as idioms when they are not parts of larger idioms, is that we can now
assert that any utterance consists wholly of an integral number of idioms. Any composite form which is not itself idiomatic
consists of smaller forms which are’. (Hocket
1958:172)
Idioms will thus range from morphemes to proverbs or even poems, taking
pronouns, proper names and figures of speech.
Idiom formation is a constant process, and Hockett makes this significant
point in the following words.
‘the less productive a pattern is, the more likely it is that if a new
form does get coined by the pattern it will have idiomatic value’. (ibid.:308)
In general, Hockett’s account of idiom emphasized the following points: ·
Idiomaticity is taken to be completely pervasive of language
i.e. idiomaticity is a common throughout – present and seen or felt everywhere. ·
Hockett deliberately and carefully admits morphemes to
idiom status while other definitions exclude single morphemes (by referring to
‘morpheme arrangements’, a ‘group of morphemes’, or by specifying an idiom as
a complex, a morpheme as a simple expression) or even words. ·
It is not particularly forms which are idioms but occurrences
of forms in the context of particular utterances.
Generally speaking, Hockett is thorough in mapping out the full territory
covered by his definitions of idiom, and undoubtedly the class he has constituted
is linguistically significant. … Indeed it closely resembles the more recently
postulated class of ‘lexemes’. This is
the better term: Idiom is more usefully reserved for a smaller, more tightly defined
class of complex expressions. 2.5 DWIGHT BOLINGER: 1961-1975
A main point to begin with here, is Bolinger’s early proponence of gradualism,
and the same principle informs his discussion of “Collocations and Idiom” in the
textbook: Aspects of Language (Bolinger 1975).
Gradient ‘degrees of tightness’ are demonstrated in the syntactic deficiencies,
freedom of lexical substitution and semantic ‘specialization’ of phrases.
Idioms, Bolinger, saying in effect, shade into collocations, and collocations
into free constructions, in both compositionality and productivity.
Bolinger’s ‘Meaning and Memory’ (1974, published 1976) attacks the REDUCTIONISM
of mainstream generative grammar, its analysis of all data into determinate rules
and features, Language, he says, contains a vast number of ‘pre-fabs’, stored
in meaning, at every level:
Lexical units larger than words … idioms … where reductionist theories
of language break down … a vastly more persuasive phenomenon than we ever imagined. (Bolinger
1976:3) Idioms,
tightly bound phrases, shade away gradually into free forms through collocations,
clichés, and illocutionary formulae. Word meanings are indeterminate, not ambiguous:
ambiguity is a reductionist’s ‘semantic illusion’ (Bolinger 1978:11).
Language is a creature full of indeterminacy and heterogeneity, and any
linguistic theory must reflect this.
The principles underlying Bolinger’s work we find both congenial and convincing,
his insistence on the pervasiveness of gradience and indeterminacy, in particular,
should strike a warm chord in the heart of anyone familiar with idioms and their
relations.
Bolinger also argues that idiomaticity is far more persuasive than one
might think, and we should note the lickneness to Hockett, whose conception is
such that ‘any utterance consists wholly of an integral number of idioms’. 2.6 KATZ AND POSTAL, 1963
The first account of idiom to be influenced by the work of Noam Chomsky
was Katz and Postal’s ‘Semantic Interpretation of Idioms and Sentences Containing
Them; (1963), a concise and tightly-packed little article which has significantly
influenced virtually all work on idioms since.
The now-standard non-compositionality definition makes its first appearance:
The essential feature of an idiom is that its full meaning is not a compositional
function of the meaning of the idiom’s elementary grammatical parts. (Katz
and Postal 1963: 175) The
go on to distinguish ‘lexical idioms’ from ‘phrase idioms’, that is,
‘Those idioms that are syntactically dominated by one of the lowest level
syntactic categories, i.e., noun, verb, adjective, etc. from those whose syntactic
structure is such that no single lowest level syntactic category dominates them’. (ibid.:275)
The distinction too pervades latter work although too often in the form
of exclusive concentration on ‘phrase idioms’ (notably verb + object groups) and
the exclusion or neglect of “lexical idioms” (i.e. compound words, and noun +
adjective, verb + particle, and similar clusters).
Lexical idioms are listed as nits in the lexicon.
For phrase idioms, however, considerations of simplicity in syntactic and
phonological description suggest that:
at least the members of the class of idioms whose occurrences also have
compositional meanings must receive the ordinary syntactic structure assigned
to occurrences of the stretches with compositional meanings. (ibid.:277)
Although they are not units in the syntactic lexicon, phrases and idioms
do have this status in the semantic dictionary, indeed they make up a separate
list, and are interpreted some what differently from ‘lexical items’.
This method … assigns readings to higher level constituents in underlying
phrase markers, not to terminal symbols … which represents the fact that (an idiom’s)
meaning cannot be broken up into components and these parceled out to the morphemes
that makeup the idiomatic stretch. (ibid.:278)
The article is of crucial historical importance, it both makes good use
of, and contributes to, the then current form of transformational-generative grammar,
and many of its important claims (the non-compositionality of idioms, the distinction
between lexical and phrasal idioms and the inclusion of compound words among the
former, the semantic unity of phrase idioms) demand in any account of idiom based
on any model of language. 2.7 URIEL WEINREICH: 1966, 1969, 1972
The next attempt to describe idioms in the terms of generative grammar
was made by Uriel Weinreich (the first one being that of Katz and Postal). Weinreich was one of the first few generative
grammarians seriously to tackle semantics, taking the following position:
The goal of semantic theory … is to explicate the way in which the meaning
of a sentence of specified structure is derivable from the fully specified meanings
of its parts. (Weinreich
1972:44)
As early as in 1961 (‘On the Semantic structure of Language’, published
1966) he was in the process of developing a formal combinatorial semantics for
natural language and pointing out trouble spots: a section on ‘Contextual effects
on designation’ mentions polysemy, depletion, idiomaticity and determination.
The general theory was further developed in ‘Explorations in Semantic Theory’
(1965, published 1972), and idioms receive their fullest treatment in the 1969
lectures, ‘Problems in the Analysis of Idioms’.
Weinreich’s definition follows the pattern set by Katz and Postal, 1963:
…idiomaticity … a phenomenon which may be described as the use of segmentally
complex expressions whose semantic structure is not deducible jointly from their
syntactic structure and the semantic structure of their components. (Weinreich
1972:89)
Weinreich makes an admirable attempt to analyse how the meaning of an idiom
works (many other linguists content themselves with explaining how it doesn’t
work). Having concluded that ambiguity, or polysemy,
is an essential feature of idiom, he looks at, the possible levels or mechanisms
of ‘contextual specialization of subsenses’, concluding that:
… the highest degree of idiomaticity is registered … when the subsenses
of a morpheme are suppletive, when the selection is determined by a unique contextual
morpheme, and when the contextual selection works both ways.
When all these criteria are satisfied, there results an expression such
that there are not limits to the difference between its semantic structure and
the semantic structure of its paraphrase. (Weinreich
1969:41-2)
Weinreich considered at some length the problem of the decision as to whether
a phraseological unit should be stored in the dictionary as a whole, or dissolved
into its constituents.
The syntax of idioms in a transformational grammar is discussed at length
and an attractive method worked out for their incorporation. The problem of semi-productivity and its relation to familiarity
is touched on, and a complete deduced for language structure acquisition, and
use.
Weinreich strikes a commendable balance between the use of semantic and
syntactic criteria, and shows a refreshing willingness and ability to articulate
alternative theories and to admit the shortcomings of his own. The details of his discussion and conclusions are clearly informed
by their basis in early transformational-generative grammar, but the argument
remains sufficiently clear and reasonable to be accessible to idiomatologist of
any persuasion. ‘Problems in the analysis
of Idioms’ (Weinreich, 1969) remains the clearest, most positive and most sensitive
study of the subject yet made in the generative tradition, or perhaps in any. 2.8
ALAN HEALEY 1968
Healey’s basic allegiance to tagmemics shapes his definition of idiom as
‘a group of two or more morphemes and an equal or greater number of tagmemes whose
meaning as a whole is not deducible from the meanings or any sub-grouping thereof’,
thus including compound words. There follows
a series of tests by which a suspected idiom can be identified and reduced to
its essentials. First,
remove or replace its morphemes one at a time.
If such a change does not destroy the idiomatic meaning of the expression,
then the morpheme concerned is probably not part of the idiom. Secondly,
Take each component morpheme in turn and search for other collocations
in which it occurs with the same meaning as it appears to have in this suspected
idiom. Often the search is fruitful and the idiom
disappears, and in the process we have become familiar with one of the less familiar
usages of the particular morpheme. (ibid.:72)
Healey thus becomes the first to make clear the relationship between idiomaticity
and degrees of productivity and to require that an idiom be fully non-productive.
A third possible test for idiomaticity, is
to expand or transform the expression.
If the results are ungrammatical or changed in meaning, the form is confirmed
as an idiom.
Finally, he sets the following criterion for considering an utterance as
an idiom:
‘a semantically unique occurrence of any kind of element plus the essential
(minimal) context in which it occurs are together treated as an idiom’. (ibid.:77)
After setting the criteria for considering an utterance as idiomatic (deletion,
replacement, expansion and transformation tests), Healey presents his own classification
of idioms, which is impressive and carefully organized:
‘Small sampling of some of the commoner types of English idioms … The primary
classification is in terms of each idiom’s syntactic behaviour in its external
context. Within these groupings the idioms are subgrouped
to their internal structure. (ibid.:80) They
range from compound words to long phrases, through nouns, verbs and numerous types
of modifier, conjunction etc. (This list is reprinted in full by Makkai (1972:341-8),
and is well worth perusal.
Healey goes on to defend the status of an idiom as
‘a structural unit very similar in its general properties to the morpheme,
differing from it, mainly in the type(level) of internal complexity’. (ibid.:94) and
briefly discusses the special problems of the lexicographer and language teacher.
In general, the article is remarkably unbiased, unassuming, and useful.
Healey’s list and its principles of organization are valuable in any study of
idiom, and essential to the interesting problem of their odd syntactic behaviour. 2.9 BRUCE FRASER 1970, 1976
Another discussion of the syntax of idioms, within the framework of transformational
grammar, found in Aspects of the Theory of Syntax’ is that of Bruce Fraser.
He claims that an idiom is:
‘a constituent or series of constituents of which the semantic interpretation
is not a compositional function of the formatives of which it is composed (Fraser
1970:22)’. and
its literal counterpart will have an identical representation in syntactic deep
structure, in this agreeing broadly with Katz and Postal and with Weinreich and
adducing similar arguments.
The bulk of Weinreich’s paper attempts to provide a generalized system
to account for the degree of transformational deficiency of particular idioms. He does that by setting up a ‘Frozeness Heirarchy’
of five levels for types of transformation, and arranging idioms along this hierarchy
in such a way that an idiom which allows any one will (in theory) allow any one
below it. Thus the dictionary entry for
an idiom need only give a numbered level from L0 (completely frozen) to L5 (minimally
restricted).
In his 1976 book the Verb-Particle Combination in English, Fraser is still
interested in the syntax of phrasal idioms, still sets up his classifications
on the basis of their degree or type of transformational deficiency, but a deliberate
attempt to present all ideas and conclusions in as neutral terms as possible (Fraser
1976:V) makes the account much more accessible. The data base is also impressive, even without
the appendix of nearly 1000 English verb+ particle expressions defined and shown
in use. 2.10 WALLACE CHAFE 1970
Chafe also made valuable underlying assumptions – in this case as a semanticist
– and used deliberately his terminology from the mainstream of linguistic research.
However, it is worth working through his writings and taking his suggestions
into consideration. For a long time Chafe had been concerned with
the place of idioms in language structure. He found them of special interest because they seemed to him to
be clear instances of morpheme arrangements in which the morphemes themselves
could not be looked upon as semantic units. He
illustrated the above point with the following example:
‘If I say that ‘Henry is dragging his feet’, for example, it is likely
that neither the meaning of ‘drag’ nor the meaning of ‘feet’ is present, but rather
some other meaning much closer to that of ‘procrastinate’, ‘delay’ or ‘temporize’. I saw that it was this latter meaning which
functioned I semantic structure in the way in which I had thought of morphemes
as usually functioning. It became obvious
from such example that at least some semantic units had to be turned into configurations
of other units before they could enter the phonological area; that
the unitary meaning similar to that of ‘temporize’, for example, had to
be turned into the postsemantic configuration “drag one’s feet” before anything
further could be done…’ Using
the above-mentioned example, he speaks of a semantic change: esp. idiomaticization:
‘… a kind of change that could be labeled “idiomaticization”. He
assumed that at an earlier stage of English “to drag one’s feet” had only the
literal meaning. At some point in the history of English a change occurred which
amounted to the creation of a new semantic unit with the meaning alluded to above.
The conversion of this new meaning into sound, however, made use of material
already in the language, material such as ‘drag’ and ‘feet’ which might otherwise
have semantic relevance but which in this case played only a post role. Accordingly,
idiomaticization was responsible for pushing apart surface and semantic structure.
After introducing and discussing the concept of idiomaticization in the
first four chapters of his book “Meaning and the Structure of Language”, he devoted
chapter five to the effect of “idiomaticization”.
What kind of semantic change is it that creates this gap between semantic
structure and symbolization? In
answering this question, he believes, it is the growth of new semantic units …
an increase in the size of semantic inventory was one of the principal factors
in the evolution of language. In this chapter, he explains how this same
expansion of semantic structure and symbolization. The crucial consideration here is that new semantic units need someway
of being converted into sound. They need
not, however, acquire a sound which is distinctively their own but may avail themselves
of the fact that there are other semantic units which already have established
symbolizations … He thinks, aside from those rare instances where a new symbolization
is consciously invented (like Kodak or gas), is that the symbolization resources
of already existing semantic units are appropriated.
Chafe went on to develop the effect of idiomaticization issue giving different
examples: He
mentioned as one kind of semantic change the sprouting of a new meaning from
an old one in some particular context. Such a new meaning will be vigorous and independent
in that context but will not exist elsewhere. A historical development of this kind, for
example, must be responsible for the meaning usually carried by the sound ‘red’
in the context of ‘hair’. ‘Red hair’ is
usually thought to mean ‘hair’ that, is of a colour which would not otherwise
be called ‘red’, something actually closer to orange, perhaps. Suppose, we call the old meaning ‘red1’, and
the new one ‘red2’. When a new meaning
like ‘red2’ develops in some context it does not completely eclipse the old one
in the context, although the new one is much more likely than the old one to occur
there. Hence, the sound ‘red hair’ is
ambiguous, either red, or red2 may be present in the semantic structure, though
the latter is more to be expected. Outside of the context of hair, however, only red1 is found (if
we ignore the several other meanings which the sound “red” may carry.) This example shows for one thing that the new
meaning is a discretely different semantic unit from the old one… Then Chafe turned to a semantic unit in English
which can be labeled make1, having to do with acts of putting something together: “Chris
makes radios”. There is another, contextually
very limited unit make2 which, when applied to, a bed, means something like “restore
to a properly neat condition”. Thus, “make
a bed” is ambiguous in the same way as “red hair”. …
A semantic unit like red2 or make2 -- one
which does not have a direct symbolization of its own but which trades on the
symbolization of another (or others) – can be called an idiom.
He distinguished them by calling them restricted idioms. Chafe
offered, however, another kind of idiom which might be called unrestricted … He
took “off-base” as an initial example. Chafe
concludes chapter five of his book by presenting his categorization of idioms:
‘Idioms are semantic units, and … that semantic units, fall into a number
of different categories; … “off-base” and “on-the-wagon” are in traditional terms
“adjectives”, “spill the beans” and “trip the light fantastic” are “verbs”, while
“red-herring” and “lily of the valley” are “nouns”. Semantic
units like these all belong to a type which I shall later call lexical, characterized
by a relatively high degree of information context, relative in frequency in use,
and various features of semantic distribution.
Other semantic units may be called at this point ‘nonlexical’. It will be enough for the reader to associate them with traditional
“inflections” … we might take as examples the so-called progressive aspect and
perfective aspect in English…’ (ibid.:49)
In broad line, Chafe’s position is that an idiom is represented in semantic
structure by a representation of its idiomatic meaning – “spill the beans”, for
example, by “disclose information indiscreetly” – and that this is converted first
by “literalization” to a composite post-semantic configuration and, then by post-semantic
rules’ to a surface structure. The manipulation
of semantic features such as ‘plural’ or ‘definite’ or inflectional features such
as ‘passive’ must take place before literalization and so their selectional restrictions
must be tested against the semantic representation. Any later alterations will
block the idiomatic reading of the surface structure. 2.11 T.F. MITCHELL 1971
T.F. Mitchell developed the concept of ‘collocation’ which is originally
conceived by J.R. Firth. In ‘linguistic
‘Goings on’: Collocations and other Lexical Matters Arising on the Syntactic Record”,
he sketches a general theory of meaning and defines collocations, colligations
(a class of collocations with a common word-class for one element is a colligation),
idioms, and compounds against this background, concluding with a statement of
the basic principles of Firthianism.
Leaving Mitchell’s definition of collocation aside, we will concentrate
on his description of idiom:
‘the idiom belongs to a different order of abstraction.
It is a particular cumulate association, immutable in the sense that its
parts are unproductive in relation to the whole in terms of the normal operational
processes of substitution, transportation, expansion, etc. This is presumably what is implied by the usual
‘notional’ definition of an idiom as an entity whose meaning cannot be deduced
from its parts.’ (Mitchell
1971:57)
It would seem to follow from Mitchell’s insistence on linguistic gradience
rather than slicing into levels, and his use of roots rather than words that the
status of a complex expression as one word or many should have no effect on its
idiomaticity.
A resume’ of Firthianism concludes
the paper, which despite a slight obscurity of style and occasional oddities of
theory, uses commendable general principles to work out some valuable distinctions
and classifications. 2.12 QUIRK et al 1972
In their book: Grammar of Contemporary English 1972, the writers treat
Multi-word verbs of English in a detailed manner: An 8-page section (pp.811-818)
including a number of illustrating examples.
These examples are divided primarily into two sets: (For convenience, we
will not retain the numbers given to these examples in that reference but we shall
use our own serial numbers in citing them):
Let’s examine the first set:
John called the man [1]
John called up the man [2]
John called on the man [3]
John put up with the man [4]
Then, from these examples, follow the discussion and categorization below:
Verbs can be divided into ‘single-word verbs’ as in [1] and multi-word
verbs, which are PHRASAL VERBS (as in [2]), PREPOSITIONAL VERBS (as in [3]), or
PHRASAL-PREPOSITIONAL VERBS (as in [4]).
Leaving aside, for the moment, the internal differences of multi-word verbs,
we will first distinguish this set from other, superficially similar sequences
consisting of verbs and prepositional phrases (the second set):
John called from the office
[5]
John called after lunch [6]
John called from under the table
[7]
The difference between the first set, represented by sentences [2-4], and
the second set, represented by sentences [2-4], and the second set, represented
by sentences [5-7], can be stated in terms of ‘cohesion’ : in the first set, the
adverbial or prepositional particle (up, on, up with) forms a “semantic and syntactic”
unit with the verb; in the second set, the prepositional particle (from, after,
from under) is more closely connected with the head of the prepositional phrase.
Then, the authors go on to establish the semantic criteria for testing
the semantic unity in phrasal and prepositional verbs (the first set) which can
often be manifested by substitution with a single-word verb, for example, ‘visit’
for ‘call on’, ‘summon’ for ‘call up’, ‘omit’, for ‘leave out’, ‘see’ for ‘look
at, etc.
Furthermore, phrasal and prepositional verbs have composite meanings which
are not normally deducible from their parts, for example, make out (understand),
take in (deceive), come by (‘obtain’). The
terms ‘phrasal’ and ‘prepositional’ verbs are not, however, restricted to such
idiomatic combinations. We can distinguish
three subclasses within the first set (where it will be convenient to refer to
both the adverbial and prepositional element as ‘particle’): a)
The verb and the particle keep their individual lexical meanings, as in
‘look over’ (‘inspect’), ‘set up’ (‘organize’).
The individuality of the components appear in possible contrastive substitutions:
 
bring in
3 4
take out
 
turn
on 3 4
switch off b)
The verb alone keeps its basic lexical meaning and the particle has an
‘intensifying’ function: find (out) (‘discover’), sweep (up) the crumbs, spread
(out) the rug. c)
The verb and the particle are fused into a new idiomatic combination, the
meaning of which is not deducible from its parts, for example, bring up (‘educate’),
come by (‘obtain’), put off (‘postpone’), turn up (‘appear’), come in for (‘receive’). In
such combinations there is no possibility of contrastive substitution: there are
no pairs such as bring up/down, give in/out, etc. for this subclass.
The adverbial, lexical values of the particles have been lost, and the
entire verb-particle combination has acquired a new meaning.
In some cases, the same verb-particle combination can belong to more than
one subclass with a corresponding difference in meaning:
The house (literal meaning)
John went into 3
The problem (figurative meaning)
(‘stay with’)
John put up with Mary 3
(‘tolerate’)
Using the same examples above Quirk et al applied the syntactic criteria
below to distinguish the first set from the second one: a.
Passiviation
The syntactic similarity of verbs in the first set can be seen in their
acceptance of passivization.
called up First
set: The man was 3 called on
put up with
* Lunch was called for Second
set: 3 * The table was called from
under
? The office was called from
In the passive, the verbs of the first set behave identically as single-word
transitive verbs (The man was called), whereas the verbs of the second set do
not admit of the passive. Note that ambiguous
combinations like ‘put up with’ take the passive only when they have the
figurative meaning:
Mary couldn’t easily be put up with (=’tolerate’ but not=’stay with’)
Combinations of verbs and prepositional phrases which are awkward in minimal
sentences can, however, become more acceptable with appropriate contextualization: “This office has been called from so may times
that it was natural to assume that it was, the source of the latest call”. b.
Pronominal Question Form
The questions of the first set are formed with ‘who(m)’ for personal and
with ‘what’ for non-personal objects:
Who(m) did John call up?
What did John look for?
There is a certain amount of overleap between the two sets. If we apply the three criteria (P) passivization, (Opro) Pronominal
question form, and (Q adv) adverbial Question form, to sentences 8-12, their relations
can be stated by means of a matrix: P
Qpro Qadv +
+ -
The police might ask for more details
[8] -
+ -
John agreed with Mary
[9] -
+ +
The car stopped beside a wall
[10] -
- +
She left before ten o’clock
[11] -
- -
His job also comes into the picture
[12] Looking
back to the above table, one can notice the following:
Sentence 8 has both passive and pronominal question form:
More details might be asked for by the police
[8p]
What might the police ask for?
[8 Qpro]
Sentence [9] has only the pronominal question form: Who did John agree
with? [9 Qpro) The passive is highly doubtful:
?Mary was agreed with by John. [9P]
Sentence [10] can form no passive, but both types of question are possible;
the pronominal one is rather ‘recapitulation’, whereas the adverbial one is the
more natural question:
What did the car stop beside [10
Q pro]
Where did the car stop? [10
Q adv]
Sentence [11] has only the adverbial question form:
When did she leave? [11 Q adv]
Sentence [12] finally shows its idiomatic nature by accepting none
of the three criteria, resisting this kind of syntactic manipulation.
After distinguishing multi-word verbs (the first set) from prepositional
phrases (the second one) Quirk et al indicate the internal differences of multi-word
verbs. They divide them into the following: a)
phrasal verbs as in [2], b)
prepositional verbs as in [3] and c)
phrasal-prepositional verbs as in [4]
Then they defined prepositional verbs as:
“… we will count as prepositional verbs those which accept the passive
and/or the pronominal question form but not the adverbial.
…, this dichotomy will separate
[8] and [9] from [10] and [11], which will be analysed as single-word with prepositional
phrases as adverbials. [12] is a lexical
idiom that does not obey productive syntactic rules of the kind we have discussed”. (Quick
et al 1972:815)
They continue their definition of multi-word verbs classes showing phrasal
verbs, in comparison with prepositional ones:
‘Returning to the first set, it now remains to distinguish between phrasal
and prepositional verbs: they display certain (a) phonological and (b) syntactic
differences: a)
The particle in phrasal verbs is normally stressed and, in final position,
bears the nuclear tone, whereas the particle in the prepositional verb is normally
unstressed and has the ‘tail’ of the nuclear tone on the lexical verb:
He called ‘up the man – The man was called ‘up
He ‘called on the man – The man was ‘called on b)
A syntactic difference is that the particle of a phrasal verb can often
stand either before or after a noun, whereas it can only stand after a personal
pronoun:
Call up the man,
Call the man up,
Call him up, but not
* Call up him (unless it has contrastive stress:
Call up ‘him, not his ‘sister). (Quirck
et al 1982:815)
Then a table shows these and other criteria that distinguish the two classes
of verbs as having different syntactic patterning with regard to ‘noun object’
(as in e): ‘personal pronoun object’ (b) and (f); ‘position in relative clause’
(d), and ‘adverb insertion’ (c). The table
shows that prepositional verbs take (b) personal or (d) relative pronouns after
the preposition, and admit (c) an inserted adverb: phrasal verbs, on the other
hand, have particles which can separated from the verb by (e) a noun or (f) pronoun.
Diagnostic Frames for Phrasal and Prepositional Verbs Prepositional
Verb Phrasal
VerbCall
on = ‘visit’ call
up = ‘summon’ a)
They ‘call on the man
They call ‘up the man b)
They ‘call on him
*They call up him c)
They call ‘early on the man
*They call early up the man d)
The man on whom they call *The
man up whom they call e)
*They call the man on
They call the man ‘up f)
*They call him on
They call him ‘up (Quirk
et al 1972:816)
Before proceeding to the third class of multi-word verbs (i.e. phrasal
– prepositional verbs), there is a comparison between “verb – adjective combination”
and phrasal verbs: (= discussing, here, what are not phrasal verbs?).
“There is a verb – adjective combination that is very similar to phrasal
verbs. - He
put the cloth straight (adj)
- He
put it out. (adv. Particle)
Where
only ‘put out’ is considered a phrasal verb. Both combinations form close units but the
adjectives in verb-adjective combinations have their individual meaning and grammatical
properties: John
didn’t put the table cloth as (straight as Mary). John
didn’t put the table cloth as (*out as Mary). (Quirk
et al 1972:816)
Other examples of verb-adjective combinations are: cut short, set free,
…
Then, quirk et al present the third class of multi-word verbs: Phrasal
– prepositional verbs:
“Phrasal verbs are combinations of the two multi-word verb classes that
we have discussed …” - ‘We
are all looking forward to your party on Saturday’.
- ‘He
had to put up with a lot of teasing at school’.
- ‘Why
don’t you look in on Mrs. Johnson on your way back?’
- ‘He
thinks he can get away with everything’.
(ibid.:
(816-7))
To illustrate further the above three categories of multi-word verbs, Quirk
et al give, in their text, a short list for each verb class wit glossaries for
meanings and illustrations.
To conclude this review of Quirk et al’s ‘Grammar of Contemporary English’,
one can say that this reference is very clear introduction to the subject of multi-word
verbs of English especially pages (811-818). The term multi-word verbs appears in the reference
as a jargon for these verbal combinations which consist of a verb + particle or/and
prepositions: It is the broadest term which embraces those verbal combinations
which are idiomatic and those which are “non-idiomatic” and, as we have seen in
our review of earlier views on this component of vocabulary (and we shall see),
most of the authors, dictionaries compilers, linguists, etc. use the term “phrasal
verbs” which does not cover, according to its definitions, all verbal combinations
but is limited only to those “idiomatic verbal combinations” – A reason for which
the researcher opted for the term “Multi-Word Verbs” as a second component of
the title of the present study. The semantic
or syntactic criteria discussed in this book equipped the reader with a rich source,
especially the transformation operations which are discussed in detail.
In sum, the book is relevant to our present study and many other books
in the subject referred to as an standard reference in this important area of
vocabulary: multi-word verbs. 2.13 ADAM MAKKAI 1972
Makkai’s Idiom Structure in English (1972), a revised version of his 1965
Yale Ph.D. thesis, is a full and detailed study, with some solid insights and
distinctions. He begins with an extensive survey of earlier work and an admirably
clear summary of the development and principles of stratificational grammar.
In the central theoretical section, namely that ‘Two Idiomaticity Areas
in English’ are set up, the lexemic and sememic.
Lexemic Idioms are composed of more than one minimal free form (expressions
with a unique constituent (pseudo – idioms: Cranbery, kith and kin) and compound
words are thus excluded). They must also
be able to mislead or ‘disinform’ an unwary listener.
Sememic Idioms such as proverbs are of sentence length and have both an
acceptable literal meaning and an additional moral or message; they allow considerable
transformation, modification and compression. Finally, Makkai, mentions the possibility of
finding ‘hypersememic’ or ‘progmemic’ idioms whose meaning depends on their use
within a particular culture.
Idioms are then divided into six lexemic and nine sememic classes. The two most important are L/1, (Phrasal Verb
Idioms), and L/2 (Tournune Idioms). Phrasal Verb Idioms are of the verb + particle type (bring up, take
off). Tournures, the largest lexemic idioms,
contain at least three free lexons, and allow only limited inflectional change.
Most are verbs. Makkai’s sub-division according to the presence
of compulsory it, a, the, irreversible, binomial or “be” is probably not the most
significant or useful that could be devised. Nor does he mentioned that they are usually (although not always)
metaphorical: cheq the rag, smell a rat, pull up stakes. They are, however, distinguished elsewhere as
‘idioms of decoding’ (which must be learned individually before they can be understood)
from ‘phraseological peculiarities, idioms of encoding’, in which ‘misunderstanding,
unintelligibility, the ability to mislead and ambiguity … are not involved (Makkai
1972:25), but which are still sufficiently unpredictable in form that they must
be learned before they can be used (English to drive a certain speed, French “avec”
(with).
A short concluding section on ‘Typological Implications of Idiomatic Analysis’
foreshadows the interest in university which is developed in some of Makkai’s
later work. The second half of the book comprises lists and partial analysis of
idioms in the six lexemic classes, especially L/1. Here Makkai has crossed 100 common verbs with 25 formants’ (i.e.,
prepositions or particles). Listing and
cross-listing every idiom among the resulting forms, with graphs and percentages
for the actual versus the potential number of occurrences for each constituent.
The method and lists are interesting.
By 1973, in “The Cognitive Organization of Idimaticity: Rhyme or Reason?” Makkai has developed the notion of a ‘Pragmo-Ecological
Grammar’ whose ‘central axis’ is the ‘lexecon’ (= ecological lexicon) a vast computerized
web of ‘lexemes’ and ‘sememe nests’ with frequency listings and dialect markers
(Makkai 1973:11). He is then committed
to the notion of dismantling the meaning of an idiom and pigeon-holing it under
the entries for its constituents in the ‘lexecon’. Idiom is accordingly redefined: ‘An idiom is an entry in the ecological dictionary of English
whose number of cross references is twice the number of its constituent words
(once for every lexeme as expression carrier, and once for every lexeme as to
its belonging to a certain semantic nest) plus its own idiomatic meaning which
is not deductible from its components (Makkai 1973:12). The
principle mechanism for the creation of new idiomatic forms is: the multiple “reinvestability” principle … Idioms come about
in the course of the development of natural languages because the language is
running out of raw material in its ever-increasing need for new terms as new discoveries
are made, new items are named… (ibid.:16)
Many of the above ideas reappear in the 1978 paper ‘Idiomaticity as a Language
Universal’. The definition of idiom was
virtually unchanged (Makkai 1978:413), and the ‘ecological dictionary of English’
was still shown as the prime objective.
‘Multiple reinvestment’ is again as the principal and Language – Universal
source of idiom, and it is suggested that unpleasant or sexual terms tend to be
obsessively repeated in other senses and that meaning will always shift from the
concrete towards the abstract. (ibid.: 422-6, 43-43).
Makkai’s work is thorough and carefully organized, and in its earlier stages
makes some good points: the encoding/decoding distinction is useful, for example,
and the parallels between ‘lexemic, sememic, and possible ‘hypersememic’ or cultural
idioms are interesting as well as his arguments and his impressive collections
of data. 2.14 SAUSSURE 1973
In modern linguistics, Saussure (1973:12) makes a brief mention of idioms
which can be summarized as : they couldn’t be changed (transformed), according
to usage restrictions, and they are unpredictable – they are made by the tradition. Saussure called them ‘ready-made utterances’
(‘Locutions toutes faites’): expressions which are learned as unanalysable wholes
and employed on particlar occasions by native speakers. 2.15 CHARLES RUHL 1975
Ruhl’s first contribution is an obscure 1975 article entitled ‘kick the
bucket is not an Idiom.’ The gist of his
argument is that the verb ‘kick’ is associated with the notion of ‘death’ in a
number of expressions, so that in this one the ‘bucket’ is the only idiomatic
constituent. He followed this up with
‘Idioms and Data’ (1976, published 1977), attacking Makai’s Idiom Structure in
English’ for forming conclusions from insufficient data. According to him:
An idiom is a construction whose words occur elsewhere but never with the
same meaning as in this construction. (Ruhl
1977:459)
Ruhl suggests that many so-called idioms have one constant very abstract
meaning which can account for their various surface uses, rather than being ambiguous
(and thus there are many fewer idioms in a language than as generally thought). 2.16 RONALD E. FEARE 1980
The book to review in this section is Practice with Idioms. The purpose of this workbook is to encourage
the active participation of the learner in acquiring knowledge of the meaning
and structure of idiomatic expressions. This
point is developed below:
It is believed that students of English especially those of the intermediate
and advanced levels at which this book is aimed, are capable of searching for
and discovering much of the relevant information regarding proper idiom usage
with only minimal guidance and instruction from the teacher. This active involvement in the learning process
can be of much greater benefit to the student than simple memorization. (Feare
1980:ix) Then,
the writer explained the means which was used to realize the active involvement,
mentioned above:
‘To achieve this goal, the author has chosen to employ inductive, problem-solving
techniques in this workbook. Much emphasis
has been placed on the ability to guess meaning from the context within which
an idiom is used, and on the ability to figure out the grammatical features which
distinguished certain sets of idioms.’ (ibid.:ix)
He went further to assert that the results would be positive and greater
if these important skills are acquired.
‘Once students are equipped with the necessary skills for analyzing and
understanding idiomatic forms, they will be in a much better position to expand
their knowledge beyond the scope of this workbook.’ (ibid.:ix) On
page xiii, some instructions and guidelines are given to the instructor:
‘Use of this workbook requires some basic awareness of English grammar. Such terms as “subject”, “verb”, “preposition”, and “transitive/intransitive”
should be well understood before an instructor attempts to use this book.
The author would strongly suggest that the instructor preview the chapters
before work with the students begins, especially those units which deal with the
important grammatical characteristics.
“… The instructor should find the exercises to be self-explanatory for
the most part and should have little trouble in advising students of the work
to be done. The instructor should soon feel comfortable
in guiding students through their work, helping them to discover and understand
for themselves the rules and concepts associated with the various idiomatic expressions’. The
organization of ‘Practice with Idioms’ as it is shown by its author, is as follows:
‘The idioms are divided into chapters according to their grammatical category.
The chapters covering intransitive verbal idioms form Section I of the book; chapters
covering transitive verbial idioms form Section II.
Chapters covering nominal, adjectival, and adverbial form Section III.
It is believed that verbal forms are more useful in general and deserve
far greater concentration and effort. This is the reason why they constitute the
larger and more important sections of the book. (ibid.:
xiii-xiv)
After outlining the general plan of the workbook, there follows a detailed
description of how to work through a chapter.
For the great importance of this description, in direct classroom practices
and procedures, the researcher finds it is excusable to quote it at length: (The
explicitly taught course, on idiomatic expressions and multi-word verbs, given
to the subjects of this study, made a good use of this description). Working
Through A Chapter Part
I, a guessing exercise which begins each chapter, requires the student to analyze
the contextual setting of the idiom and to extract an appropriate definition or
synonym. In addition, the student is asked
to underline those clues in the sentence which help him to guess the possible
meaning of the idiom. These tasks foster and refine the student’s ability to rely on his
own knowledge and skill in deciding on meaning. This exercise also promotes class discussion and tends to limit
student dependence on dictionaries as a source of definition. It is important to realize that there are no
“correct” answers at this initial stage: the student is merely trying to provide
some possible, acceptable meanings for the idioms. No attention should be given at this point
to the grammar of the idioms, as this is covered thoroughly in following parts
and would be a premature consideration. Part
II, a matching exercise, provides the student with a way to check the guesses
made in Part-I. The definitions are listed on the left side of sentences which
have blanks to be filled in with appropriate idioms; the sentences are comprised
of context clues which are very similar to the ones found in Part-I.
The student can take a definition and check the context of the sentence,
go back to Part-I to match up the definition and context with the correct idiom,
and then place that idiom in its proper blank.
The instructor would guide the student through this process, helping him
to notice similar contexts when difficulties arise.
In this way the student can develop his ability to discover the meaning
himself before resorting to outside reference, such as dictionaries. Part
III provides a detailed explanation of each idiom.
Information includes a listing of the most common noun phrases which are
associated with each idiom. When necessary, further useful points on grammar
or meaning are given. Some example sentences
show how the common noun phrases are used with the particular idiom.
A set of possible discussion topics is also provided to encourage student
feedback and the sharing of ideas with each other and with the instructor. Part
IV focuses on the grammatical features which tie the idioms in each chapter together.
A brief introduction provides the student with the basic grammatical framework
of the chapter. The student is then asked
to compare and analyze sets of contrasting sentences, some correct and some incorrect,
which draw out the relevant grammatical features. After he has tried to discover the rules by
answering the questions posed, the students finds an explanation which he tried
to uncover. It is highly recommended that
the instructor preview this part before starting each new chapter. Part
V is a multiple-choice test of idiom understanding and retention. Review
is cumulative through each of the first two sections of the book, so in later
chapters the student must be careful to follow the correct grammar rules as well
as pay attention to the important contextual information.
In addition to discussing why an answer is correct, it is also useful to
discuss the inappropriateness of other choices as a way to differentiate between
the various verbal forms. Part
VI requires the student to write a brief, original sentence using an idiom in
correct response to a specific question. The context is provided but must e developed
appropriately.
All the exercises and parts of each chapter in section I and II build on
the idioms from previous chapters, so that idioms already learned are constantly
being reviewed. This also applied to section III, although verbal forms are not
included as review. REVIEW: ‘The
review chapters for Section I and II also provide valuable reinforcement of
grammatical forms, as well as useful information about changing the verbal
idioms into nominal (noun) and passive (verb) forms. In addition, topics for paragraph writing,
role-playing and further discussion are provided as interesting ways for students
to apply the knowledge they have learned.’ (Ibid.:xv) Under
the heading “Teacher as Facilitator” the author clarifies the role of teacher
in this workbook: ‘Until students begin to feel comfortable with the new approach
in this workbook, all exercises should be done in class, preferably as group activities
or on an individual – student basis with the instructor moving around the room
offering advice. Optimally, the first two chapters would be done entirely as group
activities. It is the author’s suggestion
that the first two exercises in each chapter also be done in class in order to
promote discussion and to discourage students from looking ahead to part III to
find the answers. Only the last two exercises
in each chapter are recommended for outside homework at any stage or level.
The instructor should use his or her own discretion in differentiating
class-work and home-work as he or she becomes familiar with the students abilities. The instructor will probably be most involved
in the third and fourth parts of each chapter, as they delineate the semantic
and syntactic features of the idioms, and therefore require more explanation.’ (ibid.:XVI) After
providing the instructor with some suggestions and guidelines for handling the
material in this workbook as well as indicating explicitly his role, the author
writes the following to the student:
‘In this workbook, you will be studying the grammar rules of idioms, as
well as meanings. These rules will describe
and distinguish various kinds of idioms: if you are able to separate and understand
these different types, you will have an easier time using the idioms you have
studied as well as learning new ones … This
brief introduction should give you an idea of the new material you will be learning
in this book, but learning new material is not all that you will be doing.
Slowly but surely you will be learning new ways to guess the meaning of
unfamiliar idioms by yourself. A student
who develops the necessary skills of guessing will be better prepared to learn
the new, and more difficult idioms he or she encounters outside of class.’ (ibid.:xvii)
To conclude, it goes without saying that the fact that this workbook is
written by instructor (at the American Language Institute at San Diego State University)
makes it a practical and useful material since it is the outcome of a practitioner
close interaction with classroom needs and practices. It is also worth mentioning that the researcher
makes use of this text in carrying out the experiments in the present study particularly
in devising the pre-test, the proposed ‘course content’ on idiomatic expressions
and ‘multi-word verbs’, and the post-test given to the subjects. 2.17 MICHAEL J. WALLACE 1982
In his book ‘Teaching Vocabulary’, Wallace (1982) devoted a whole chapter
(chapter 8; pages 116-124) on idioms and multi-word verbs. The introductory sentence
to this chapter reads as follows: ‘… we are going to look at two special areas of vocabulary
which cause a lot of concern to EFL teachers and learners; idioms and multi-word
verbs.’ (Wallace: 116) Then,
he established a working definition of idioms: ‘However, it could be suggested that a practical definition
of ‘idiom’ for teaching purposes will contain three elements: (1) idioms consist
of more than one word; (2) idioms are
fixed collocations; and (3) idioms are semantically opaque.’ (ibid.:
118)
Depending upon the above definition, he went further to mention the following
points concerning teaching and learning of idioms: ‘First of all, there does not seem to be any point in grouping
idioms together, and teaching them together, simply because of some words they
have in common. In some books for teaching idioms, for example, several idioms
which happen to mention animals (e.g. let the cat out of the bag; rain cats
and dogs; lead a dog’s life, etc) are taught together. This is pointless since… the literal meaning
of the words has little or nothing to do with the real meaning of the idiom.
It is a bit like teaching the words ‘football’ and ‘ballroom’ together,
because they both contain the word ‘ball?’ The most sensible thing, in fact, is to treat idioms as
unusually long words, and to teach them as one would teach any new word; that
is, as they occur in a meaningful context.’ (ibid.:118)
The second limit made by Wallace, regarding teaching and learning of idioms,
is the transformation possibility (or impossibility) of some idioms; Do they admit
passivization, pronominalization etc. It may be useful to indicate what changes the idiom can
undergo, and this often relates to the idiom’s underlying meaning … Let us return to an example we have used
often, ‘let the cat out of the bag’.
It is possible to make this expression passive and say: the cat has been
let out of the bag. This is possible because
the underlying meaning (‘reveal a secret’) can also be made passive (‘the secret
has been revealed’). An expression like,
‘it was raining cats and gods’ (‘it was raining heavily’) obviously cannot
be made passive because of the underlying meaning.
But this will not always explain what is possible and what is not possible
as far as altering the structure of idioms is concerned, and learners may need
some help on this. (Wallace
1982:118-9)
Wallace summed up his discussion of idioms saying that they are special
form of collocation which will be encountered by every learner and that although
there have been various attempts to classify idioms, there seems little to be
gained by dealing with them under different linguistic categories; they are best
treated as individual lexical items, to be learnt as such.
After giving the above account on idioms, Wallace turns to the second area
of this chapter: multi-word verbs: providing the following definition: ‘A multi-word verb is a verb plus a particle (i.e. preposition
or adverb), or, sometimes, a verb plus two particles, which join to form a new
structural unit.’ (ibid.:
119)
Then, there follow some examples of multi-word verbs (abide by, cross off,
do without, come down with etc.) and a categorization or division of multi-word
verbs into: “Phrasal Verbs” and “Prepositional Verbs”, and this is the way that
they will be referred to in his discussion of these sub-sets.
Under the heading ‘Teaching Multi-word Verbs’, the writer mentioned three
main areas of error: 1. in productive language, the use of the
wrong particle with the verb – a problem of collocation; 2. receptively, not being able to understand
these multi-word verbs which are also idioms; 3. generally, problems arising from the special
nature of these verbs: their different structural patterns (eg. with pronouns)
their special stress patterns, and so on.
Bearing in mind the phrasal/prepositional verbs distinction, Wallace discusses’
in the following lines, some semantic and syntactic considerations which have
their implications on teaching and learning of multi-word verbs:
‘Look at these two sentences. Which
one contains the prepositional verb? 1.
She always looked after her father when he was ill. 2.
Jane arrived after her uncle, who was early. ‘… the first sentence which contains the prepositional verb
(looked after), whereas the second sentence contains the verb plus preposition,
(arrived + after). Because it is a structural
unit, transformation can be applied to ‘look after’ which cannot be applied to
‘arrived + after’. ‘Look after’ can, for
example, be made passive: ‘He was always looked after by his daughter when he
was ill’. The second sentence cannot be made passive. ‘Look after’, like many other prepositional
verbs, is not only a structural unit, it also a semantic unit. (ibid.:120-1)
Wallace developed the statement above (the semantic and structural unity
of prepositional verbs) indicating its implications for the way they should be
taught emphasizing the former: ‘… By this we mean that the verb and the particle has lost
some or all of the their original sense to form a new unit of meaning – in other
words, it is an ‘idiom’ … it means that there is little point in grouping prepositional
verbs by either the verb or the particle. (ibid.:
121)
In some text books, prepositional verbs: ‘Prepositional verbs should be taught as individual lexical
items as they arise in context. Students
should learn prepositional verbs as a unit, so they realize that the particle,
is an integral part of the verb it goes with.’ (Ibid.:
121)
To complete his treatment of the teaching and learning points of multi-word
verbs, the authors went on to discuss the second category of these verbal combinations
i.e., phrasal verbs. His concentration,
here, is on objects, articles and pronouns position: ‘Like prepositional verbs, phrasal verbs are structural
units. The main difference in this respect
is that with phrasal verbs the verb is often separated from its particle. So we can say:
Put down that book! Or
Put that book down!
Indeed the second sentence is perhaps the normal (’unmarked’) form of a
phrasal verb and its object. Of course
a prepositional verb cannot be separated in this way.
The difference is even more striking if the object noun phrase is a ‘pronoun’,
such as ‘him, her, it, etc’. In that case
the pronoun nearly always comes between the verb and its particle.
Put it down!
Look it up! (= check it in a reference boo, etc)
Take it away!
Then, there follows a suggestion for grading the examples, given to learners,
starting with the most ‘literal’ or transparent ones, which can be easily situationalized
in the classroom:
‘… Put your books down
Take these books back to the library
Write these words down.’
After giving a considerable contribution in the syntactic of phrasal verbs
in classroom, Wallace provides the reader with the semantic handling of this category
i.e. the treatment of the semantic aspect of phrasal verbs. ‘If a teacher to cover the meaning aspect of phrasal verbs
systematically, … the best strategy is to probably to concentrate on the ‘particle’. One of the features which is often overlooked in teaching
phrasal verbs is that the particles of such verbs often develop special meanings.
The particle ‘up’, for example, is used with many verbs to give a sense
of ‘completeness’ as in these examples: fill up, finish up, … tear up…’ Once examples of these meanings have been met with in context,
students can be asked to give other examples from their vocabulary store, or to
guess the meanings of sentences provided by the teacher. (ibid.:
123)
An important point which relates phrasal verbs to idioms is made;
‘There are many phrasal verbs…, which are complete idioms and have to be
learnt units, e.g., show someone up (=humiliate), make something up (=invent),
smoke someone out (=expose), and so on.’ (Wallace
1982:124)
A concluding paragraph compares idioms and multi-word verbs in teaching/learning
processes in this way: ‘Idioms and multi-word verbs present many similarities in
treatment from a teaching and learning point of view, largely because they occupy
overlapping areas in language. Multi-word
verbs are more capable of systematic treatment in certain respects, as we have
indicated. As in other areas of vocabulary, most of the learning should be done
in a realistic language context, if possible, exercises and drills should be confined
to those occasions where such systematic treatment can speed the learner on towards
his goal of mastery of the target language. (ibid.:124)
Before ending up this sub-section on reviewing Wallace, 1982, it is worth
mentioning that Michael J. Wallace wrote or compiled a dictionary entitled “Dictionary
of English Idioms” published 1981 (before the publication of “Teaching Vocabulary”
mentioned above).
However, his dictionary is a collection of English idioms. Each idiom is given a simple definition and an example sentence
to show the context in which it is normally used. Priority is given to idioms in common use likely to cause difficulty
to the foreign learner: Emphasis is on true idioms (according to him):
Those expressions whose meanings cannot be easily worked out from the words
they contain. (Wallace
1981:5, Introduction). 2.18 A.J. THOMSON AND A.V. MARTINET 1986
In their book ‘A Practical English Grammar’, (4th ed. 1986)
Thomson and Martinet devoted a 37-page chapter entitled ‘Phrasal Verbs’ in the
introduction of which we can read:
In modern English it is very usual to place prepositions or adverbs after
certain verbs as to obtain a variety of meanings:
give away = give to someone/anyone;
give up = abandon (a habit or attempt);
look after = take care of;
look for = search for, seek;
look out = beware (Thomson
& Martin 1986:315)
On the same page, mentioned above, they advised the student to neglect
the preposition/adverb distinction in such verbal combinations: ‘The student need not try to decide whether the combination
is verb+preposition or verb+adverb but should consider the expression
as a whole…’
This advice which is questionable, as we shall see, in this study, that
this distinction is very useful since it influences the syntactic behaviour of
these verbal combinations.
They go on to mention the importance of learning whether the combination
is transitive (i.e. requires an object) or intransitive (i.e. cannot have an object). ‘… Note that it is possible for a combination to have two
or more different meanings and to be transitive in one/some of these and intransitive
in others. For example, ‘take off’ can
mean ‘remove’. It is then a transitive
expression.
He took off his hat. ‘Take off’ can mean “rise from the ground” (used for aircraft).
Here it is intransitive eg. The plane took off at ten O’clock.’ (ibid.:
315)
Going back to page 104, from the same reference, we find that the writers
stated that many words can be used as either prepositions or adverbs giving the
following pairs of examples to illustrate this point: 1.
He got off the bus at the corner. (pre)
He got off at the corner. (adv) 2.
They were here before six (pre)
He has done this sort of work before (adv) 3.
Peter is behind us (Pre)
He is a long way behind (adv)
It is worth mentioning that there are some exercises concerning phrasal
verbs (appeared in Exercises book 2, which accompanies the main book): twenty
exercises, (spread over 28 pages (from 1 to 28), in respect of phrasal verbs)
with answer key (pp. 166-170).
To round off this book review, we can say that this treatment of ‘phrasal
verbs’, in standard reference of modern and practical English grammar, is closely
relevant to our research topic especially its explicit mention of the possibility
of combining verbs with prepositions or/and adverbs so as to provide new meanings
– an issue which will be recurrent in discussing multi-word verbs of English the
second component of the title of this study. It is also important to mention that Thomson and Martinet’s: A Practical English Grammar and its companion:
Exercise book 2 (20 exs, devoted to phrasal verbs, from p.1 to 28) proved useful
and valuable for the pre-and post-tests given to the subjects in this study as
well as its contribution I the contents of the explicit course given to the same
subjects. (a full account of these tests
and the explicit taught course will be provided in chapters 5 and 6 of this research). 2.19 JENIFFER SEIDL AND W. MC MORDIE 1988
Their book ‘English Idioms and How to Use Them’ (1988, 5th edition)
is divided into ten chapters. Each chapter
deals with various ‘key words’ (e.g. high frequency adjectives or nouns, numbers,
colours) or with a ‘key structure’ (e.g. noun phrases, phrasal verbs, phrases
with prepositions).
The contents of each chapter are arranged alphabetically for easy reference. The content lists show in detail where the
various types of idioms are to be found and a full index makes the book particularly
user – friendly.
Under the heading: “Where and When to Use Idioms” the following obstacles
are mentioned: ‘One of the main difficulties for learner is knowing in
which situations it is correct to use an idiom. A further difficulty is knowing whether an idiom is natural or appropriate
in a certain situation i.e. the level of style. Another difficulty is that of fixed and idioms
with variants…’
After citing the above general problems, the writers concentrate on those
which are peculiar to phrasal verbs: ‘A particular difficulty experienced by learners
is the correct handling of expressions consisting of verbs in combination with
prepositions or (adverbial) particles, for example, ‘take off’, ‘sit in on’, ‘leave
out’. Such verbs are a typical and frequent
occurrence in all types of English esp. in every day spoken English’.
… An additional problem is knowing how the combination is used in a sentence
i.e. the problem of word – order. The
word-order depends on whether the verb is followed by a preposition or by a particle.
E.g.
I saw the plan through (particle)
I saw through the plan (preposition) (Seidl
and McMordie 1988:103) 2.20 JOHN SINCLAIR et.al 1989
As we have said, in our introduction to this chapter, Collins COBUILD Dictionary
of Phrasal of Verbs is one of the standard references in verbal combinations which
will be given a considerable space in this review. To
begin with the compilers brief description of its content in their foreword:
‘This dictionary
concentrates on one particular aspect of the grammar and vocabulary of English:
combinations of verbs with adverbial or prepositional particles, they are extremely
common in English. This combinations are
generally called phrasal verbs.’ (Sinclair
et. Al 1989:iv) Then,
there follows a table which summarizes the verbal combinations which are included
in the Dictionary and those which are not.
TABLE-2 VERBAL
COMBINATIONS INCLUDED IN COLLINS COBUILD DICTIONARY OF
PHRASAL VERBS
| Example |
Phrasal
verb type |
Included |
Category
No. |
Reason |
|
We
want to town | Idiom | No | - | ‘town’ is part of the idiom. |
|
The
town went up | Non-literal | Yes | Go
up 10 | New meaning- ‘explode’ |
|
The
number refers to the day | Fixed particle | Yes | Refer
to 3 | ‘refer’ always occurs with
‘to’ | |
It’s
going along fine | Completive | Yes | Go
along 4 | Particle reinforces verb |
|
Thomas
hit back | Semi-literal | Yes | Hit
back 1 | Frequent occurrence |
|
We
went up the hill | Literal | Yes | Go
up 1 | Common verb and particle |
|
Don’t walk on the grass | Literal | No | - | Meaning is clear |
(Sinclair
et al 1989:vi)
They go on to mention its statistical treatment and characteristics: ‘… the dictionary has been based on a detailed computational
study of the extensive ‘Birmingham Collection of English Texts’. (ibid.:vi)
After this brief description of the dictionary, there is explicit mention
of several teaching and learning points of phrasal verbs especially those related
to problems and difficulties. These problems
and difficulties are indicated on different occasions. A summary of these points follows below: ‘Phrasal verbs are often of a particular problem for learners
of English for the following reasons: … one reason is that in many cases, even though students
may be familiar with both the verb in the phrasal verb and with the particle,
they may not understand the meaning of the combination, since it can differ greatly
from the meanings of the two words used independently. For example, make, put, out and off
are all very common words which students will encounter in their first weeks of
learning English, and yet the combinations make out and put off are not transparent.
Make out can mean ‘perceive’ or ‘imply’ put off can mean ‘postpone’ or ‘deter’,
amongst other meanings, these meanings are unrelated to the meanings of the individual
words in the combinations. The fact that phrasal verbs have a number of
different meanings adds to their complexity.’ (ibid:iv)
After discussing some of the meanings’ problems of phrasal verbs. The writers turn to pinpoint the grammatical
ones: ‘There are some particular grammatical problems associated
with phrasal verbs. For example, there
are restrictions on the position(s) in which an adverb can be placed in relation
to the object of a verb. Some particles, such as about, over, round, and through
can be used as both adverbs and prepositions in particular phrasal verbs combinations,
although in other combinations they are used either adverbially or prepositionally. Some phrasal verbs are not normally used with pronouns as
objects, others are normally only used with pronouns as objects.’ (ibid.:iv) There
is also mention of other difficulties, such as the fact that there are frequently
strong collocational associations between phrasal verbs and other words.
Thus, in some cases a particular word or small set of words is the only
one normally found as the object or object of a particular verb.
Before concluding our review of this dictionary it is worth mentioning
that this dictionary contains an index of the particles, showing their different
meanings and listing the phrasal verbs containing those meanings. In this way, you can understand the patterns
underlying the combinations and you can see the relationship in meaning between,
for example, cool off, ease off, and wear off, or between look up, join up and
link up: ‘The particles Index is an extensive guide to the way in
which particles are used in English phrasal verbs. It acts as an index to the dictionary, listing phrasal verb head-words
alphabetically within given categories of meaning. It also gives the actual number of occurrences
of each particle, which will be of interest to teachers, who may use this information
to determine which phrasal verbs to focus on… The Index lists groups verbs which share particular meanings,
and thus the patterns of meaning of the particles themselves can be seen … The meanings of English phrasal verbs are not always obvious.
Yet the particles index shows very clearly how phrasal verbs are not just
arbitrary combinations of verbs and particles.
Instead, they fit into the broad patterns of choice and selection in English.
When a new combination occurs, it too fits into these patterns. The particles Index will help you to deal with these new
combinations, and phrasal verbs as a whole will become a more manageable part
of the vocabulary of English.’ (ibid.:449)
In general, Collins COBUILD Dictionary of Phrasal Verbs gives clear and
extensive treatment of over 3000 phrasal verbs, with 12000 examples showing actual
use. Synonyms and antonyms are included,
as well as stylistic guidance. A unique particle index deals in depth with the
adverbs and prepositions used in phrasal verb combinations.
To conclude, what we have summarized and quoted above (concerning the general
features and characteristics of this dictionary as well as the teaching and learning
points, appeared in various and on different occasions) made this reference closely
relevant and valuable to our study. 2.21 A.P. COWIE AND R. MACKIN 1993
The ‘Oxford Dictionary of Phrasal Verbs’ (formerly published (1975) as
the Oxford Dictionary of Current Idiomatic English, Volume-I) provides one of
the most comprehensive and systematic surveys of phrasal verbs in English.
The contents and the main features of the Dictionary could be outlined
below: o
Examples of use taken from a wide range of contemporary
sources, many drawn from the New Oxford Corpus of the English Language. o
Synonyms, opposites and related verbs shown at the end
of entries. o
Grammatical codes at each entry showing possible sentence
patterns. o
Lists of typical collocates showing how the verb is most
frequently used in everyday English. o
Explanations of unusual features of grammar and usage. The
scope and aims of the Dictionary are articulated as follow: ‘Knowledge of a wide range of idiomatic expressions, and
the ability to use them appropriately in speech and writing, are among the distinguishing
features of a native – like command of English. Part of the great range consists of the two
word combinations usually known as phrasal verbs e.g. Step up (supplies) lay on
(transport) and take up (the story). Phrasal verbs are commonly used by native speakers but constitute
a well-known stumbling block for foreign learners, who because of the associated
problems of structure or meaning may fall back on a more formal one-word equivalent
– increase, provide, continue.’ (Cowie
andMackin 1993:422) Then
the compilers stated that the most serious difficulties of phrasal verbs are those
of meaning: ‘A French speaker would surely understand ‘continue’ more
readily than ‘take up’, while a native speaker might have difficulty in explaining
the sense of the combination in terms of its constituent parts. In fact a close study of phrasal verbs (and
of more complex idioms containing phrasal verbs such as ‘make up one’s mind’)
brings to light many curious anomalies of form and meaning. While we can equally well talk of ‘angling
for’ or ‘fishing for compliments’, where the verbs are as freely interchangeable
as when they are used in a literal sense, we would not say of a friend that “he
had difficulty in making up his thoughts” (as distinct from his mind).
And while we might want to say of him that “he found it hard to hit the
nail on the head”, we would not substitute ‘strike’ for ‘hit’ unless we were thinking
literally of his skill with the hammer rather than figuratively of his inability
to say precisely what he meant. Among
collocational pitfalls of this kind the mature speaker of the language picks his
way with unconscious ease. The foreign
student, though, looks for clear guidance on many hundreds of phrasal verbs in
current use, often in considerable detail.’ (ibid.:422)
There follow other problems related to meaning, especially that of complex
expressions (and those of the more numerous two-word combinations,) which learners
face: ‘… They may have difficulties of understanding or interpretation
(especially when the form of an expression is a poor guide to its meaning. They may have trouble in discriminating accurately between
various meanings of the ‘same’ item – those of put out, for example, or take in. And again, they may need help in distinguishing between
phrasal verbs which are related in form (cf. level off and level up) though not
necessarily in meaning.’ (ibid.:429)
Also, it is worth quoting at length the following paragraphs, in which
the compilers of this dictionary address the crucial question of ‘idiomaticity’
considering some complex issues under the following headings of the brief introduction
to this reference: The vocabulary of English is full of short phrases consisting
of a ‘verb’ and a ‘particle’ such as up, down, through, and across. Although they
may appear simple, combinations such as break down, make up, and take out represent
one of the most complex and difficult problems for students of the language.
There are three major areas of difficulty.
Grammar
The same combination of words may be used in a variety of grammatical structures. Think of run up as used in A girl ran up, The spider
ran up the wall, The soldier ran up a flag and Would you mind running me up the
road? Here the sentence patterns are
all quite different, even though the meanings are related … Idiomatic
or non-idiomatic How do we know whether the words fall out as used in I
was pleased with the way things had fallen out form a unit of meaning (an
idiom) or not? An idiom can be recognized
by a number of simple tests, and these have to do with meaning rather than grammar.
One test is to ask whether one word can be substituted for the whole phrase
fall out. (We can substitute ‘happen’ and ‘occur’).
Another test is to ask whether the second word can be deleted. (It can’t.)… Complex
Idioms Sometimes a pair of words, such as make up or blow off,
seem to have an additional word (or words) attached to them in such a way that
the whole phrase forms one complex idiom. Consider in this respect make one’s
mind up and blow off steam. It is not
always easy for the learner to see that the extra words form part of a larger
whole, one that must be learned as a single unit … (ibid.:ix-x) 2.22 A.P. COWIE, R. MACKIN AND ISABEL McCAIG 1993
In the following pages, we shall look at one of the standard references
on idioms in English: ‘Oxford Dictionary of English idioms’ which formerly published
as: ‘The Oxford Dictionary of Current Idiomatic English Volume 2, 1983’. v Headphrases
I this volume have been arranged in a strict alphabetical order to make the location
of individual entries as easy as possible. v Over
14000 references recorded and described. v Explanations
of unusual features of grammar and usage. v Simple
grammar scheme showing sentence patterns. v A
detailed index of all nouns, verbs, adjectives and adverbs used in headphrases. v A
second index of derived compounds and structural variants of expression. v A
thorough cross-reference system both to other entries in the dictionary and to
relevant entries in its compassion volume, the Oxford Dictionary of Phrasal Verbs. Generally
speaking, under different and various headings, and on many occasions, there is
mention to teaching and learning points, especially those related to problems
and difficulties. The following is a summary of these points. ·
To begin with these lines from the ‘Foreword’ in which
Mackin writes (indicating the possible audience for this reference). ‘…
the present dictionary was written primarily for the use of foreign learners of
English, though for those at an advanced level’. (Cowie
et. Al (1993:vi)) ·
Secondly, there is an explicit indication of the importance
of idiomatic expressions for the native speaker and the foreign learner: ‘The
accurate and appropriate use of English expressions which are in the broadest
sense idiomatic is one distinguishing mark of a native command of the language
and a reliable measure of the proficiency of foreign learners’. (ibid:x) ·
Thirdly, the compilers go on to discuss the difficulties
of the meaning of idiomatic expressions to the learners: ‘…
Of all the difficulties the most familiar is that of meaning: to the learner,
idioms such as ‘fill the bill’ or ‘spill the beans’ do not mean what they appear
to mean. The sense of the whole cannot
be arrived at from a prior understanding of the parts.’ (ibid.:x) ·
Fourthly, there is a precaution in respect of quantity
and quality of words used in an idiomatic expression: ‘Knowing
how many words, and which words, to substitute is important for the learners,
because failure to make the right choices, may result in combinations that no
native speaker would produce. It is for this reason, among others, that many
foreign learners steer clear of English idioms altogether. The student therefore needs clear guidance
on these points of lexical detail’. (ibid.:xvi) ·
Finally, the issue of the syntactic and semantic freedom
of idiomatic expressions or their fixation is discussed: ‘One
recurrent problem faced by foreign learners wishing to use or understand English
idioms is that while some are entirely fixed others allow the speaker a measure
of choice. … the choices open to him may vary both in kind and in degree.
Faced with the idiom burn one’s boats, for example, he must understand
that while the verb burn can be used in many of the tenses associated with its
non-idiomatic use, idiomatic boats can only occur in the plural form.
Moreover, while bridges (also plural) can be substituted for boats with
no change of meaning, ships cannot. The
extent to which the form of an idiom can be altered in these various ways is largely
unpredictable, so errors can easily be made.’ (ibid.:xxi) 2.23 MALCOLM GOODALE, 1993 AND 1996
Malcolm Goodale 1993 wrote a workbook, accompanies the Collins COBUILD
Dictionary of Phrasal Verbs, entitled Collins COBUILD Phrasal Verbs workbook. It goes without saying that the fact that the
author is a teacher (at the United Nations in Geneva) makes it a practical teaching
and learning material since it is originated from real teaching and learning situations.
This stimulating book helps students from an intermediate and advanced
level to master the meaning of phrasal verbs and use them effectively and appropriately. Practice is approached through the individual
particles, such as in, out, and up, as described in the particles Index of the
Dictionary. Ten units of workbook material
offer carefully graded exercises that can be used in class or for self-study.
The following points are considered as general features of this workbook: ·
Based on the
evidence of COBUILD and including real examples. ·
Around 300 phrasal
verbs given detailed treatment. ·
Graded activities
to promote thorough understanding and natural use. ·
Guidance on synonyms
and register in ‘Language Comments’. ·
Full answer key
included, to allow for successful independent use.
In the introduction to this workbook, the writer clarified its approach,
the nature and content of the book, how to use it, and general information about
sections division and exercises: ‘… Though the workbook can be used on its own, more benefit
will be gained by working closely with the Dictionary. The workbook practices the most important phrasal verbs,
with around 300 different meanings. Almost
50% of these are formed with 18 common verbs. Six common verbs (bring, come, get, go, put
and take) account for nearly 30% of the phrasal verbs in this workbook. This workbook is a vocabulary book rather than
a grammar book. There are ten units of material. The first nine units deal with single particles
and these units are arranged in alphabetical sequence in the book; the final unit
concentrates on seven more particles. All the units follow a similar format, and can be studied in any
order. As this book is designed both for
class-work and self-study, an answer key to the exercises is given at the back
of the book. Every unit has an introductory page giving the important
meanings of the particle being studied with lists of the phrasal verbs to be practiced
in each section of the unit… If a category of meaning includes phrasal verbs which are
particularly difficult to understand, the first exercise, asks you to complete
the definitions of some or all of the phrasal verbs, subsequent exercises involve
matching phrases or sentences; choosing the phrasal verb that best fits a gapped
sentence, from three alternatives provided; deciding on an appropriated phrasal
verb to fill a gap, where no alternatives are given.. At the end of each unit there is a separate section on revision
exercises, so that you can check your progress’ (Malcolm
Goodale, 1993:iv)
To conclude, ‘Collins COBUILD Phrasal Verbs Workbook’ is a useful and practical
text that enables the learners to master this component of vocabulary. These characteristics
make this book indispensable in teaching and learning phrasal verbs which represent
a major part of multi-word verbs – the second element of the present study title.
Malcolm Goodale continued his effort to provide the readers with ‘workbooks’
to accompany COBUILD Dictionaries: After
writing Collins COBUILD Phrasal Verbs Workbook (1993) (reviewed above), he published
Collins COBUILD Idioms Workbook in 1996.
It focuses on 250 of the most common idioms in current use in British and
American English. It is organized in 30
chapters, each of which looks at a group of idioms centering around a particular
theme. The material is suitable for both
class-work and self-study. Again, the fact that it is written by a teacher makes
it a reliable material since it is based on real classroom interaction and experience.
As his first workbook on phrasal verbs, this text is useful and closely
relevant to the present study since it provides opportunities for practicing idiomatic
expressions: it could serve as one of the options of the sources to draw on while
devising a course on this important component of vocabulary. 2.24 JOHN SINCLAIR et.al 1995
After reviewing ‘Collins COBUILD Dictionary of Phrasal Verbs’ (in section
2.20), we shall turn in this section to its companion volume: the Collins COBUILD
Dictionary of Idioms: In general, this is an important new dictionary from the
innovative COBUILD team. It explains approximately
4400 current British and American English idioms. It gives in-depth treatment of their meanings, contexts of use,
and pragmatics, and it includes a rich collection of examples taken from the Bank
of English. The Bank of English provides
a wealth of information about the frequencies, forms, and usage of idioms today.
Because the COBUILD dictionary is based on this unique resource, the information
which it gives about this fascinating area of language is reliable and up to date.
From the introduction, of the same reference above, I quote the following
lines to show the close relation between our research topic and this standard
reference: ‘Idioms are one of the most interesting and difficult parts
of the English vocabulary. They are interesting
because they are colourful and lively and because they are linguistic curiosities.
At the same time, they are difficult because they have unpredictable meanings
or collocations and grammar, and often have special connotations. Idioms are frequently
neglected in general dictionaries and in classroom teaching, because they are
considered marginal items which are quaint but not significant. Yet research into
idioms shows that they have important roles in spoken language and in writing,
in particular in conveying evaluations and in developing or maintaining interactions.
The COBUILD Dictionary of Idioms sets out to give detailed coverage of
these points… The COBUILD Dictionary of Idioms is primarily intended for
teachers for English and intermediate and advanced learners…’ (Sinclair
et al. 1995:iv) 2.25 A.S. HORNBY (5th ed. 1996)
In the Oxford Advanced Learner’s Dictionary of Current English (5th
edition 1996 by Jonathan Crowth), we find (besides its definitions of idioms and
phrasal verbs as general entries) that it helps with understanding and using idioms
and phrasal verbs. This help is given
in what are called: the Study Pages A2-3 and A6-7, which are found between pages
278 and 279 of this Dictionary.
To begin with phrasal verbs one can read the following definition (under
the sub-title what are phrasal verbs):
‘Look at the verbs in the sentences below: ·
Jan turned down the offer of a lift home. ·
Buying that new car has really eaten into my savings ·
I don’t think I can put up with his behaviour much longer.
Phrasal verbs (sometimes called multi-verbs) are verbs which consist of
two or sometimes three words. The first
word is a verb and it is followed by an adverb (turn down) or a preposition (eat
into) or both (put up with). These adverbs
or prepositions are sometimes called PARTICLES.
There is a brief account about the meaning of these verbal combinations:
‘Look at the following sentence: ·
Sue fell down and hurt her knee badly. The
meaning of some phrasal verbs, such as fall down, is easy to guess because the
verb and the particle keep their usual meaning.
However, many phrasal verbs have idiomatic meanings that you need to learn. The separate meanings of put, up and with, for example, do not add
up to the meaning of put up with (tolerate).’ In
the same reference, Hornby went on to state that particles have meaning(s): ‘Some
particles have particular meanings which are the same when they are used with
a number of different verbs. Look at around in the sentences below: o
I didn’t see the point of hanging around waiting for him,
so I went home. o
We spent most of our holiday lounging around beside the
pool. Around adds the
meaning of ‘with no particular purpose or aim’ and is also used in a similar way
with many other verbs such as play, sit and wait.’
After discussing the meanings of phrasal verbs and particles, there follows
an indication of the possibility of substituting a multi-word verb with a single
word equivalent.
‘The meaning of a phrasal verb can sometimes be explained with a one-word
verb. Phrasal verbs are frequently used in informal
spoken English and, if there is a one-word equivalent, it is usually much more
formal in style. Look at the following
sentences: o
I wish my ears didn’t stick out so much. o
The garage projects 5 metres beyond the front of the house. Both
stick out and project have the same meaning – ‘to extend beyond a surface’ – but
they are very different in style. Stick out is used in informal contexts, and
project in formal or technical contexts.’ Similarly,
a short discussion of the grammar of the phrasal verbs is provided:
‘Phrasal verbs can be TRANSITIVE (they take an object) or INTRANSITIVE
(they have no object). Some phrasal verbs
can be used in both ways: o
He told me to shut up (intransitive) o
For heaven’s sake shut her up! She’s said for too much
already (transitive).’
They follows explanation and elaboration of the issue of transitivity/intransitivity
of phrasal verbs and subsequent rules:
‘Look at the entry below: eat out: to have a meal in a restaurant, etc rather than
at home: I’m too tired to cook tonight – let’s eat out.
Eat Out is intransitive, and the two parts of the verb cannot be separated
by any other word. You cannot say, for
example:
*Shall we eat tonight out?
The same reference went on to provide the user with the necessary information
about the position of objects in relation to phrasal verbs: ‘In order to use TRANSITIVE PHRASAL verbs correctly, you
need to know where to put the object… With some phrasal verbs (often called SEPARABLE verbs),
the object can go either between the verb and the particle or after the particle: o
She tore the letter up. o
She tore up the letter. When
the object is a long phrase, it usually comes after the particle. o
She tore up all the letters that he had ever sent her. When
the object is a pronoun, (for example, ‘it’ standing for ‘the letter’), it must
always go between the verb and the particle: o
She read the letter and then tore it up. When
in other phrasal verbs (sometimes called INSEPARABLE verbs) the two parts of the
verb cannot be separated by an object: o
John’s looking the children after. not o
John’s looking after the children after o
John’s looking after them. not o
John’s looking them after. Under
the sub-heading ‘Related Nouns’ we read the following:
‘A particular phrasal verb may have a noun related to it. .. Look for example,
at the nouns break-in and break-out in the entry for break I:
break-in (n) an entry into a building using force:
Police are investigating a break-in at the bank.
Break-out (n) an escape from prison. esp involving the use of force: a
mass break-out of prisoners. …’
The same reference, between pages 278-9, under Language Study A6-7, provides
the following information about idioms: this information under the headings below:
What are idioms? Looking up idioms
and Using idioms.
‘What are Idioms?
An idiom is a phrase whose meaning is difficult or sometimes impossible
to guess by looking at the meanings of the individual words it contains. For example, the phrase ‘be in the same boat’
has a literal meaning that is easy to interpret, but it also has a common idiomatic
meaning:
I found the job quite difficult at first.
But everyone was in the same boat; we were all learning. Here,
‘be in the same boat’ means ‘to be in the same difficult or unfortunate situation’. Some
idioms are colourful expressions, such as proverbs and sayings: o
A bird in the hand is worth two in the bush. (it is better
to be content with what one has than to risk losing everything by trying to get
much more). o
Too many cooks spoil the broth. (If too many people are
involved in something, it will not be done well). If
the expression is well-known, part of it may left out: o
Well, I knew everything would go wrong – it’s the usual
story of too many cooks. Other
idioms are short expressions that are used for a particular purpose: o
Hang in there! (used
for encouraging somebody to remain firm in difficult circumstances). o
On your bike! (used to tell somebody to go away). Other
idioms make comparison: o
as light as air o
as hard as nails
Many idioms, however, are not vivid in this way.
They are considered as idioms because their form is fixed: o
for certain o
in any case
After defining and providing a sort of typology of idioms the dictionary
offer guidance on how to look up and use those expressions. 2.26 MICHAEL McCARTHY et.al 1997
After reviewing the Oxford pair of dictionaries (of phrasal verbs and of
English idioms) and its counterparts of COBUILD, we will turn in the coming pages
to review the third pair: Cambridge International
Dictionary of Phrasal Verbs and Cambridge International Dictionary of Idioms.
Let’s confine ourselves, in this sub-section, to that of phrasal verbs.
In general this dictionary has the following audience and their needs in consideration:
It has been designed specially for learners of English, using the latest
research into the content and structure of Modern English. It contains the information
the learner needs to use phrasal verbs confidentially and accurately.
Some of the main features of this dictionary are : ·
Over 4,500 phrasal verbs current in British, American
and Australian English today. ·
Thousands of example sentences showing phrasal verbs in
context. ·
A carefully controlled defining vocabulary made explanations
easy to understand. ·
Clear and detailed information on grammar and collocation. ·
Theme panels presenting phrasal verbs in topic groups. ·
Photocopiable exercise material with answer key (specimen
of this exercise material will be reprinted in the present study: (see appendix-6). Then,
there, it is stated that they are often problematic for the following reasons: ‘… The meaning of a phrasal verb, for example, often bears
no relation to the meaning of either the verb or the particle which is used with
it. This means that phrasal verbs can
be difficult both to understand and to remember. Neither does it help that many phrasal verbs
have several different meanings nor that their syntactic behaviour is often unpredictable.; (Michael
McCarthy et. Al 1997:vii)
The compilers made further claim, namely that they have solutions for the
problems of learning and teaching phrasal verbs: ‘The Cambridge International Dictionary of Phrasal Verbs
addresses all the problems associated with this rich and complex area of the English
Language and presents information in a way which is clear and helpful. …Information on the grammatical structure of each phrasal
verb is presented in an explicit fashion … Clear and precise definitions … Every
phrasal verb is illustrated with examples based on sentences from the Cambridge
International Corpus … In addition this dictionary contains supplementary material
in the form of theme panels (Phrasal verbs shown in groups according to their
meanings) and photocopiable exercises. This makes it a unique resource which can
be used not only for reference but also as valuable classroom or self-study learning
aid.’ (McCarthy et. Al
1997:vii)
It is clear, from what we have quoted in the preceding paragraphs, that
the work of Cambridge team on phrasal verbs is relevant to our research topic
since it discussed and pinpointed the problems and difficulties faced the learner,
in the course of mastering this area of vocabulary, and it provided material for
teaching and learning these verbal combinations which form a major part of what
we termed, in this study, as multi-word verbs. 2.27 MICHAEL McCARTHY et. al 1998
In the following pages, we shall look at Cambridge International Dictionary
of Idioms. To have a general idea about
the main features and characteristics of this reference, let’s consider the following
points: ·
Around 7,000 idioms current I British American and Australian
English. ·
Thousands of example sentences based on the Cambridge
International Corpus. ·
A carefully controlled defining vocabulary making explanations
easy to understand. ·
A full index, so idioms are easy to find. ·
Photocopiable exercise material. ·
Theme panels presenting idioms in topic groups. ·
Guidance on the most useful idioms to learn.
After citing the previous general points describing this dictionary, I
shall quote the following lines from its introduction, which mentioned some teaching
and learning points, particularly the problems and difficulties encounter the
learner. ‘…Your language skills will increase rapidly if you can
understand idioms and use them confidently and correctly. One of the main problems
students have with idioms is that it is often impossible to guess the meaning
of an idiom from the words it contains. In addition, idioms often have a stronger meaning than non-idiomatic
phrases. For example, ‘look daggers at
someone’ has more emphasis than ‘look angrily at someone’, but they mean the same
thing.’ (McCarthy et
al 1998:vi)
Then the compilers explained why this dictionary has the word (international)
as a part of its title: ‘… It is truly international dictionary: it covers current
British, American and Australian idioms.’ (ibid.:vi) They
went on to show its content:
‘… It includes: ·
traditional idioms (e.g. turn a blind eye to sth, throw
the baby out with the bath water). ·
idiomatic compounds (e.g. fall guy, turkey shoot). ·
similes and comparisons (e.g. as dull as ditch water,
swear like a trooper). ·
exclamation and saying (e.g. Bully for you!, over my dead
body!) ·
clichés (e.g. all part of life’s rich tapestry, there’s
many a true word spoken in jest.) ·
In addition, there are theme panels showing groups according
to their meaning or function. ·
There are also photocopiable exercises at the back of
the dictionary (NB: A sample of this exercise material will be reprinted in appendix
6 of our present research, since it serves as one of the optional materials we
suggest(ed) for the proposed course for improving the learners knowledge and mastery
of idioms).
The introduction is rounded off by claiming the usefulness of this dictionary
in learning idiomatic expressions – an issue which is closely related to our research
topic: ‘this dictionary aims to help you not only as a comprehensive
reference book but also as a valuable learning aid.’ (McCarthy
et. al 1998:vi) 2.28 COMPARISON BETWEEN THREE PAIRS OF DICTIONARIES OXFORD DICTIONARY OF ENGLISH IDIOMS / OXFORD DICTIONARY OF PHRASAL VERBS;
COLLINS COBUILD DICTIONARY OF IDIOMS / COLLINS COBUILD DICTIONARY OF PHRASAL VERBS:
AND CAMBRIDGE INTERNATIONAL DICTIONARY OF IDIOMS / CAMBRIDGE INTERNATIONAL DICTIONARY
OF PHRASAL VERBS.
As it has been indicated, in the introduction to this chapter, much space
will be given to the above three pairs of references because of their obvious
role as teaching and learning and in the two overlapping areas of vocabulary:
idiomatic expressions and multi-word verbs of English.
This importance is mainly a result of the nature of these two areas especially
the first one since idiomatically, as we have stated frequently, is largely a
semantic matter whose treatment resides basically in dictionaries, for they deal
with meanings. However the researcher
has no intention to prefer one pair over others but consider all of them as semantic
and syntactic warehouse – as rich sources of teaching and learning materials besides
their ready-made workbooks, exercise materials and other valuable information.
The researcher would like to restate that
his position is being eclectic though he used the OUP workbook “Practice
with Idioms (amongst other exercises books such as “A Practical English Grammar”
Ex. Book 2…) in devising the outlines and detailing the contents of the explicit
taught course to the subjects of the study, for practical considerations, related
to the availability of these materials at the time of carrying the experiments.
Therefore, the following comparison serves as a base for the reader to
gain an overall view of these references and make his own judgement, after considering
these features appeared in the following pages, on which pair(s) he will concentrate.
However, the comparison is made, more or less, in terms of the following
issues / factors: Compilers, publishers, content (number of entries); whether
the data (corpus) based on computational and statistical studies… availability
of supplementary materials (course work etc), targeted audience, guidance for
students and teachers etc.
In general, the following points could be deduced from the comparison:
(for a full description and review of these dictionaries, see 2.20 – 2.22, 2.24,
2.26 and 2.27). 1. The six dictionaries are compiled by competent
and innovative teams and they are published by well-known publishers (OUP, COLLINS
and CUP). 2. These dictionaries based on computational
and statistical studies (Oxford Corpus of the English Language, Collins COBUILD
Bank of English and Cambridge International Corpus). 3. The Collins COBUILD pair of references
are accompanied by two workbooks (both written by Malcolm Goodale) while the Cambridge
pair is supplemented by ‘Exercise and Theme Panels Materials’ at the backs of
these dictionaries. For OUP ones, there are neither accompanying workbooks not
exercise(s) material(s), yet there is one workbook entitled Practice with Idioms,
by Ronald E. Feare, 1980, OUP who acknowledges A.P. Cowie and R. Mackin for their
earlier version of “Oxford Dictionary of current Idiomatic English” which proved
valuable in confirming the presentation of the grammatical categories used in
his book, i.e., this workbook could be considered as the supplementary materials
to OUP pair. 4. Regarding titles: the adjective ‘English’
attached to ‘Idioms’ in OUP dictionary, the attribute ‘international’ described
Cambridge ones indicating (according to their compilers their embracement of British
English and American English as well as Australian English) while the same characteristic
(i.e. international) could be found in Collins pair, particularly in the abbreviation
‘COBUILD’ which stands for: Collins Birmingham University International Language
Data Base. Again the word ‘English’, is not mentioned
in the idioms one of CUP pair. 5. The three pairs cater for some teaching
and learning points giving guidance to learners and teachers etc., yet OUP pair
is singled out in his explicit indication of the “Foreign learners” as target
subjects. 2.29
SUMMARY AND CONCLUSION
To sum up this chapter, on the literature review of some publications on
idiomatic expressions and multi-word verbs of English, the researcher would like
to restate that this chapter is an attempt to give a detailed survey of all known
approaches to idiomatic expressions and multi-word verbs in order to provide a
reliable theoretical framework for the represent study. That is to try to show objectively why the
researcher finds some works more suitable than all others to build on his research.
However, the following points might summarize and conclude this review. ·
The term idiom’ has been around since the antiquity and
used in a variety of senses with some more frequently and consistently used than
others. In fact the practice of most grammarians
and linguistics who have chosen to study idiomatic expressions indicate concern
with the decoding aspect of idiomaticity – understanding the meanings of these
expressions. ·
Despite the quantity of material dealing with idioms,
a surprisingly large number of prominent linguists have steered clear of idioms
almost completely. The
concept of idiomaticity is not even mentioned in Bloomfield’s ‘Postulates’ (1926)
and no discussion of idioms is provided in “Language” (1933).
Harris in his ‘Methods in Structural Linguistics’ (1951) chooses not to
mention idiomaticity at all. As Healey
points out (1968:71) some authors avoid the term deliberately, each disliking
it for some or other reason. According
to Palmer (1938:xii) it is too broad; this view is echoed by Bolinger (1947:241). Joos (1964:135) charges that the term is too
often applied to some difficult expressions in order to avoid describing them. ·
Outside of Language textbooks proper; special idiom dictionaries
as well as phrasal verbs ones have been in wide use. Their organization and underlying theoretical
concept of idiomaticity is similar to that found in the sampling language text
books, reviewed at the previous pages of this chapter, that is, phraseographical
units are alphabetically intermixed with specialized one word-items. ·
The works, we have surveyed in this chapter, show that
there are various dimensions and a considerable number of grammarians, writers,
linguistics and dictionaries compilers in the areas of idiomatic expressions and
multi-word verbs (phrasal verbs particularly): The Indian tradition eventually upholds indeterminacy of word meaning
and graded degrees of compositionality and Hockett shared with the Indian grammarians
and primary interest in “the meanings of the expressions” they are dealing with.
The “generative movement”, led off here (in this review) by Katz and Postal
with Weinreich, Fraser, and Chafe among the more important followers, describe
the syntactic deficiency in this finite class of anomalies i.e. idioms). Bolinger,
Ruhl andMitchell, are all concerned with ‘semantics’ more than syntax, sentence
meaning rather than word meaning…with the pervasiveness of idiomaticity throughout
language. The stratificational
grammar in this review, is represented by Adam Makkai (1972) who deals with idiomatic
expressions and phrasal verbs in detail. ·
However, the direct concern and treatment of Teaching
and learning of idiomatic expressions and multi-word verbs of English, in general,
is manifested in Michael Wallace, 1982 (who devoted a whole chapter (Ch.8) in
his book ‘Teaching Vocabulary’ to Idioms and Multi-Words) and Ronald E.Feare,
1980 in his workbook ‘Practice with Idioms’, among other useful vocabulary books
and references. Moreover, there are some of the specialized idiom-dictionaries
and phrasal verbs ones which are discussed in detail in this review besides an
attempt to compare some of them. The general theme of these dictionaries is that the entries found
in them are not ordinary vocabulary. Oxford
Dictionary of Phrasal Verbs/Oxford dictionary of English Idioms; Collins COBUILD
Dictionary of Phrasal Verbs/Collins COBUILD Dictionary of Idioms and Cambridge
International Dictionary of Phrasal Verbs/Cambridge International Dictionary of
Idioms are illustrative.
In spite of the large amount of literature on idiomatic expressions and
multi-word verbs of English, unfortunately no research has been carried out on
the teaching and learning of idiomatic expressions and multi-word verbs of English
in the context of Sudan. Therefore, the
present study attempts to fill a gap and provide a starting point for further
research on this topic.
|