Az Eszterházy Károly Tanárképző Főiskola Tudományos Közleményei. 1996. Vol. 1. Eger Journal of English Studies.(Acta Academiae Paedagogicae Agriensis : Nova series ; Tom. 24)

Péter Antonyi: Phrasal verbs: an attempt at a syntactic account

(2a) [

I

P [

N

P Drunks] [

r [

{ would] [

V

P [v put] [

N

P the customers] [

P

P off]]]] (2b) Drunks would put the customers right off. Radford argues that in the separated case the particle is a PP, because it can be modified by PP modifiers. He also supports his claim by completing the PP with an NP complement (postmodifier) so that 'off becomes the head of a 'real' PP (see (2d)). Both these arguments seem quite straightforward, although we have to add that completion with an NP is not always possible (e.g. look sth up what ?? etc.) but premodification is (e.g. look sth right up). However, when the particle is not separated it cannot be considered a PP because it cannot be modified by PP modifiers, neither can it be completed by an NP complement (see (2c)). (2c) * Drunks would put right off the customers. (2d) Drunks would put the customers right off their food. Particle Movement seems to ruin the clear-cut definitions of phrasal and prepositional verbs since there is a shift from phrasal to 'prepositional' verbs as Particle Movement is applied. It is, therefore, plausible to propose the separated position of the particle (demonstrated as optional in (5c) and compulsory in (5d)) to be underlying, which runs counter to the conventional approach and which is significant in that it eliminates the particle's 'mysterious' status (adverbial) and consequently weakens the theoretical distinction between phrasal and prepositional verbs. Apparently, in such a framework, the movement of the particle would be the opposite of what is traditionally called 'Particle Movement'. However, whether the particle moves or not, we know that we have the same sentence with the same phrasal/'prepositional' verb since the meaning is exactly the same. Nevertheless, it must be noted that the particle counting as a PP is a phrase that comprises a head but no complement (2a). It can take a modifier (2b) plus it may take a complement (see completion in (2d)), but the main distinction between phrasal and prepositional verbs is still in effect because the 'adverbial' particle (PP) can never take the object NP as its complement to form a full PP with, whether being separated or not. 94