Idiomatic English Phrasal Verbs Bachelor Thesis

ŠIAULIAI UNIVERSITY THE FACULTY OF HUMANITIES DEPARTMENT OF ENGLISH PHILOLOGY

IDIOMATIC ENGLISH PHRASAL VERBS BACHELOR THESIS

RESEARCH ADVISER: Doc. Dr. Ina Klijūnait ÷ STUDENT: Monika Štr ÷mait ÷; Year 4

Šiauliai, 2011 CONTENTS

INTRODUCTION...... 3 1. LINGUISTIC STATUS OF ENGLISH PHRASAL VERBS ...... 5 2. PHRASAL VERBS IN THE DERIVATIONALASPECT ...... 9 3. METHODOLOGY ...... 12 4. REVERSIBILITY/ NON-REVERSIBILITY OF PHRASAL VERBS ...... 13 5. TYPES OF PHRASAL VERBS SEMANTIC MOTIVATION...... 18 5.1. Metaphoric Phrasal Verbs ...... 19 5.2. Metonymic Phrasal Verbs ...... 25 CONCLUSIONS ...... 31 REFERENCES ...... 32 DICTIONARIES ...... 32 WEBSITES...... 33 APPENDIXES

2 INTRODUCTION

English phrasal verbs have always been drawing linguists’ attention. Verbs that consist of a verb and a particle are known as Phrasal Verbs . The verb can combine with the second component of the type down, in, off, out, up , etc. Linguistically, there are various terms for the second component, however, we will employ the term postverb . What is more, phrasal verbs are called periphrastic verb form. To define the term periphrasis we should say that it is “two or more words performing a single grammatical function together as a unit”, for example, more interesting . Usually such verbs have a one- word equivalent, for instance, wake up “awake” (Kosur, 2009:1). Phrasal verbs are widely spread in the English language. The following abbreviations are employed throughout the paper: V – verb; Vpv(s) – phrasal verb(s); Pv – postverb. One of the most significant current discussions in linguistics is the usage of idiomatic English phrasal verbs. There is a large number of different phrasal verbs used not only in fiction but also in other registers. Phrasal verbs are usually used informally in everyday speech as opposed to the more formal. They are found in many different contexts, for instance, they appear in songs (Beatles’ I’ll get by with a little help from my friends ), in film titles ( The Empire Strikes Back ), in newspaper headlines ( Country’s misplaced pride holds back its democracy ), etc. The aim of this paper is to examine the usage of idiomatic English phrasal verbs from the point of view of semantics and to find the corresponding examples to the theory. The objectives of the paper are the following: 1. to define linguistic status of English phrasal verbs; 2. to analyze the theoretical issues related to reversible/ non-reversible (phrasal verbs with literal meaning/ idiomatic phrasal verbs) phrasal verbs; 3. to discuss the theoretical issues and types of phrasal verbs semantic motivation; 4. to provide examples related to each type of phrasal verbs. Researchers have been investigating idiomatic phrasal verbs for many years and significant works have been written (as Linguistic Status of English Phrasal Verbs by I. Klij ūnait ÷ (2000), Phrasal verbs in learner English: A corpus-based study of German and Italian students by B. Waibel (2007), Phraseological units: basic concepts and their application by P. Skandera (2004), Word power: Phrasal verbs and compounds. A cognitive 3 Approach by B. Rudzka-Ostyn (2003)). The relevance of the paper is the division of phrasal verbs into non-reversible, metaphoric and metonymic. The methods used in this research paper are the following: 1. the method of derivational analysis (i.e. Vpv-s are regarded as derived from the base verbs and they are motivated by them); 2. method of oppositions intersects with derivational method, i.e. the verbs with the postverbs are analyzed in the opposition with their base verbs; 3. descriptive – theoretical literary analysis provided the possibility to review numerous issues concerning books, linguistic article, etc. related to idiomatic English phrasal verbs. The material of the paper is the examples drawn from Longman Phrasal Verbs Dictionary (2000) (abbr. L) . The scope of this research paper is 81 examples of phrasal verbs. As regards the structure of the paper, it consists of introduction, 4 major parts, conclusions, references, and appendixes. Introduction explains the subject of investigation, reveals the aim and objectives, defines research methods, and material of the paper. The first part deals with linguistic status of English phrasal verbs; the second part concerns phrasal verbs in the derivational aspect; the third part focuses on idiomaticity of verb + postverb units which includes morphological, semantic, syntactic and lexical non-reversibility; the forth part deals with the types of phrasal verbs semantic motivation which includes metaphoric and metonymic phrasal verbs. Conclusions generalize the results from the theoretical and practical parts. References indicate the list of the sources which were used while writing and analyzing our paper and appendixes provide a list of examples of phrasal verbs that are included in our paper. Practical value of the work: we presume that our research and the collected data might be useful for the students’ course of English. A survey of theoretical background necessary for the analysis is represented below.

4 1. LINGUISTIC STATUS OF ENGLISH PHRASAL VERBS

One of the most discussed problems in the study of phrasal verbs in the English language is the treatment of the linguistic status of these verbs. Linguists treated phrasal verbs from different points of view: “as verb-adverb combinations, compound verbs, as items having the status of the word or even as combinations intermediate between phraseological units and compound verbs, etc.” (Klij ūnait ÷, 2000:19). What is more, other scholars as Cowie and Mackin (1975) do not actually use the term ‘phrasal verb’; they use ‘verb-particle combination’ instead. According to Allerton (2004) it is not easy to place phrasal verbs as a unit either with collocations or with idioms; if they did not so obviously consist of two words, they could even be put up quite successfully with compound lexemes. Villavicencio (2002) mentions that verb-particle constructions (VPCs) can be either idiomatic or semi-idiomatic combinations, such as get on (e.g. Bill got on well with his new colleagues ), or more regular ones, such as tear up (e.g. In a rage she tore up the letter Jack gave her ). He also believes that VPCs should be distinguished from adverbial modification. He claims that the difference may be quite slight and thus he offers the following criteria: • the postverb may appear either after or before noun phrase (NP) in transitive VPCs (e.g. He backed up the team vs He backed the team up ). It should be added that the particle separation depends on the size of the NP, the kind of it, and the degree of the bondage of the particle with the verb; • unstressed personal pronouns must precede the particle in transitive VPCs (e.g. They ate it up but not *They ate up it ); • in transitive VPCs the particle goes before a simple definite NP and does not take it as its object (e.g. He brought along his girlfriend but not It consists of two parts ); • in VPCs subcategories, like prepositional phrases (PPs) and complements of sentence, the particle has to come immediately after the verb (e.g. rely on , in He relies on his wife for everything ); • VPCs with the particle further specifying the meaning of the verb are verbs that subcategorize for an optional goal argument that is fulfilled by a locative or directional particle (e.g. walk up in Bill walked up the hill ). According to Klij ūnait ÷ (2000:20) two factors have determined the problem of different treatment of Vpv-s and postverbs. The first factor is that postverbs are phonemically duplicated to adverbs and prepositions in postverbal position, cf. (adverb) He ran up and away. I saw him out there ;

5 (preposition) He ran up the hill. I saw him ou t the window ; (postverb) He ran up a bill. The patient saw the week out . The second factor is that we can not identify a clear contrast among the given classes of elements. These particular aspects of postverbs are settled by their common origin from adverbs with the meaning of location or direction. That is why it is necessary to differentiate postverbs from homonymous adverbs and prepositions (Ibid.). The linguistic status of postverbs has an approach known as the “differential” approach – the practical variety of the elements like out, up is in no uncertain terms claimed, and these components are separated one from another as homonymous adverbs, postverbs and prepositions. The “differential” approach is adopted in the present study and discussed in more detail (Ibid.). Such authors as Lindner (1983), Frazer (1976), Okunev (1978) and others distinguish several types of verbal combinations with the homonymous second element in the “differential” approach. They are the following (Klij ūnait ÷, 2000:22): 1) verb + adverb combinations, for example, eat out ‘to eat in a restaurant instead of at home’; 2) verb + postverb units, for instance, drink off ‘to drink a large quantity of liquid’; 3) verb + segment with the meaning of direction, for example, lead out ‘to guide or bring (sb) out of place’. The verbs of motion and transference in space are usually combined with the element with the meaning of direction; 4) verb + preposition, for instance, run up the tree , turn off the road , etc.

VERB + ADVERB In verb + adverb combinations both components keep their independent meanings. The sum of meanings of the separate parts is equal to the meaning of the whole combination. What is more, their semantic and syntactic independence is preserved by both components. The adverbs here and there provide the possibility of splitting and substituting the dependence of the second element to the class of adverbs (Klijūnait ÷ 2000:23), cf.: He ate out = He ate + He ate out (there). She slept in = She slept + She was in (here).

VERB + POSTVERB Verb + postverb combination is different from verb + adverb because both parts do not preserve their independent meanings and to a certain extent lose their primary lexical meaning (Klij ūnait ÷, 2000:24). The amount of meanings of the independent constituents is not equal to the meaning of such combinations (Ibid.). According to J.A Zhluktenko (1954:108, as cited in

6 Ibid.) the postverb can not be considered a part of speech as it is neither independent syntactically nor morphologically, it has a derivational function, i.e. can change the aspect of the verb. What is more, the meaning of a postverb can not be distinguished from the meaning of the whole unit because there is a firm cohesion between verbs and postverbs, e.g. set by, pull round, put up , etc. (Ibid.). The postverb has an abstracted functional meaning and thus verb + postverb units are treated as functional equivalents of words (Ibid.). The derivatives function as words and because of that we should consider them to be analytic ones. Nogina defines it as “a nominative sign eguivalent to a word which, unlike the word, is lacking in the integrity of morphemes” (as cited in Klij ūnait ÷, 2000:41). Thus the postverb is a part of the analytic word and at the same time it is the morpheme possessing an abstracted functional meaning and this is the reason why it plays the major role in derivation (Ibid.).

VERB + ELEMENT WITH THE MEANING OF DIRECTION Verb + element with the meaning of direction are more distinguishable from verb + postverb units. This is due to the fact that element with the meaning of direction denotes the direction of the action and changes the meaning of the verb. These elements are close to adverbs because they maintain their original lexical meaning, e.g. float up . There are different linguistic attitudes towards the second element of the combination. Some scholars, such as Lindner (1983) view such combinations as closer to verbs with postverbs (semantically single units) (Klij ūnait ÷, 2000:26).

VERB + PREPOSITION According to Klij ūnait ÷ (2000:32) the distinction between prepositions and postverbs was not clear in the works written in the first half of the 20 th century. In present days the distinction is obvious and to differentiate between postverbs and preposition some criteria are applied. They are the following (Klij ūnait ÷, 2000:32-33): 1) the semantic criterion reveals that the preposition is closely related with the noun which follows it while the postverb is closer to the verb; 2) the phonetic criterion shows that the postverb is stressed while the preposition is not in the connected speech. Nevertheless, this is not always true because the stress placement of words in the sentence may be affected by sentence rhythm; 3) the syntactic criterion reveals that preposition precedes the object if the verb is transitive. A postverb can change its position if it is homonymous. The pronoun generally precedes the postverb if the object is expressed by the pronoun. When the verb in a sentence is intransitive and there is no direct object therefore the element must

7 be regarded as a postverb. Finally, there is a tendency of the element out to replace the compound preposition out of . As a result, the element out used instead of the preposition out of has the double function – both the postverb and preposition. In her dissertation Waibel (2007:15) points to the lack of unambiguous definitions concerning the “idiomaticity” of phrasal verbs. It is difficult to describe the idiomaticity of phrasal verbs because they exhibit different degrees of transparency: “it is near to impossible to mark these different degrees of transparency on a scale since the question of transparency is not entirely free of subjectivity” (Waibel, 2007:18). The problem arises because the ability to distinguish between transparent and idiomatic phrasal verbs depends on the knowledge of language as well as on personal opinion. Waibel (2007:20) mentions another question, i.e. whether both transparent and non-transparent verb postverb combinations should be ascribed to phrasal verbs. She agrees that both kinds of combinations should be ascribed to phrasal verbs because many of them “display at least some transparency and are therefore <…> not idiomatic” (Ibid.). In addition, Waibel has found that although several linguists exclude non- idiomatic phrasal verbs from their dictionaries, most dictionaries of phrasal verbs provide both literal and idiomatic units (Ibid.). The latter approach is found in the Longman Dictionary of Phrasal Verbs 1986 and followed in the present study. In the bachelor paper we will investigate the phrasal verbs (V + pv) and we will dissociate from verb + adverb (e.g. stay in ) and from verb + preposition (e.g. he ran up a tree ). The following chapter will present a more detailed overview of the derivational aspect of phrasal verbs.

8 2. PHRASAL VERBS IN THE DERIVATIONAL ASPECT

In our paper phrasal verbs are treated as derivational units in which the postverbs functions as means of word building. Derivative means “a word or thing that has been developed or produced from another word or thing” (Ox). According to Plag (2003) there are three essential means of derivation shown in the Figure1 below:

Derivation

Affixation (includes prefixation and Conversion Compounding suffixation)

Figure1. The essential means of derivation

What is more, besides these three types of derivation Klij ūnait ÷ (2000:37) claims that derivation of verbs by means of postverbs is one more type. The established pattern verb + postverb → phrasal verbs , as periphrastic derivation, proves this fact. This type has many common elements with other means of verbal derivation, particularly with prefixation because “Both postverbs and prefixes originate from locative adverbs; both prefixes and postverbs can mark the change of the meaning of the verb, etc” (Anichkov 1961, as cited in Ibid.). Since Vpv-s are claimed to be derivational units it is advisable to describe derivation by means of postverbs from the viewpoint of the word-formation theory. The object of the investigation is the derivational pattern, having the derivational meaning. In our paper the derivational pattern of Vpv-s is the derivational pair: V (verb) → Vpv (verb with the postverb). Before starting to analyze the Vpv-s, the terms of a base verb and a derivative word must be explained. The base verb is a word to which prefixes and suffixes are added to create new words; therefore the derived words are correspondingly called derivative ones. The

9 derivative words are the result of the process of derivation. For example, instruct is the base for forming instruction , instructor , and reinstruct 1. Klij ūnait ÷ (2000:40) claims that for such languages as English it is more appropriate to use the term “base” or “derivational base” instead of “stem” because the derivational relation is between words – the base and the derivative. It is evident in all phrasal verbs because it is the first component (i.e. base verb) which takes grammatical forms and at the same time retains its formal independence, cf.: It burns out – It burnt out – It is burning out (Ibid.) . All the postverbs perform the role of the derivational means for the derivatives (Vpv-s). The derivational means are also the bearers of the derivational meaning because their function is to cause the shift in meaning of the whole (Ibid.). The goal of the study of the derivational pattern is to find out the derivational meaning of the derivative. Derivational meaning is characterized as the typical categorical meaning of derivatives of certain formal structure. The derivational meaning of the derivative is shown in the study of the derivational pattern. We can see the obvious correlation between the morphological derivation and concurrently appearing derivation of meaning, e.g. in such pairs as burn → bun out, speak → speak up . In this case the relation of the two-stage derivation becomes possible: 1) formal (i.e. in the plane of the derivational base and the derivational means); 2) semantic (i.e. of meaning). On the level of derivation of meaning there occur the following changes in the meaning of the Vpv-s marked by the derivational means, i.e. the postverb (Klij ūnait ÷, 2000:41-42): 1) the structure of the meaning of the base and the derivational means (pv). It ussually occurs in cases of V + pv with directional meaning, e.g. kick → kick in (the ball); 2) modifying the meaning of the base according to regular patterns as in the oppositions: burn → burn out (a hole) laugh → laugh away ‘to continue laughing’ 3) shifting the meaning of the base according to the individual, irregular pattern. For instance: crack ‘to break without a complete separation of the parts’ – crack up ‘to praise (sb or sth) often too highly’, e.g.: He’s always cracking up the town as very good.

1 Definition of BASE. See: http://grammar.about.com/od/ab/g/baseverbterm.htm, accessed on 12 November

2010.

10 The more or less obvious correlation between the base verb and the derivative is here indicated by the arrow ( →), while the invisible or undistinguished relation between them is shown by the dash (–). The appearance of new phrasal verbs in great numbers is found in texts of various genres. For example fantasize out ( I want to fantasize out my paper first before I do any reading on the subject ), ugly up ( If you want to be recognized as a witch in that costume you had better ugly yourself up some more ), etc. Such numerous occurrences in a great variety of meanings testify a very high productivity of the derivational pattern of V + pv → Vpv and the semantic potencies of Vpv-s (Klij ūnait ÷, 2000:42). All the Vpv-s are polysemantic, but each Vpv is used in a context with only one of all its meanings. The real unit in a speech/text is not the word itself but the word with a certain meaning. The term sememe is used to nominate such a unit. Every sememe can be explained by means of a context; in this paper all the Vpv-s are put into certain contexts which contain the minimum of necessary syntactic relations to reveal appropriate features of particular Vpv meanings. All the sememes consist of semes which are the smallest constituent parts in the meaning of a word. The next chapter will provide the necessary information concerning methodological issues.

11 3. METHODOLOGY

In order to analyze the usage of idiomatic English phrasal verbs we collected data from books and dictionaries and Longman Phrasal Verbs Dictionary (2000) was chosen as the source for examples for our investigation. We have distinguished such types of phrasal verbs as reversible (with literal meaning)/ non-reversible (idiomatic), metaphoric and metonymic. The necessary examples of Vpv-s were collected and divided according to the semantics of phrasal verbs. What is more, while analyzing the issues of metaphoric and metonymic phrasal verbs some subgroups as conceptual, individual metaphors or elliptical metonymy, with corresponding examples were distinguished. The next chapter provides the analysis of reversibility/ non-reversibility of English phrasal verbs.

12 4. REVERSIBILITY/ NON-REVERSIBILITY OF PHRASAL VERBS

Phrasal verbs are derivational units as they are derived according to the derivational pattern, V + pv → Vpv. What is more, Vpv-s can be treated from the point of view of reversibility/ non-reversibility. The term reversibility is explained as “the quality of being reversible in either direction” and the verb to reverse means “change to the contrary” or “to turn backward in an opposite position or direction”2. So, we are dealing with the features of derived words that have the semantic reversive relation with their base verb, i.e. in the process of derivation they form regular oppositions with verbs at their base (Klijūnait ÷, 2000:43), thus, such Vpv-s with literal meaning as study (the subject) → study up (the subject), play (a tune) → play out (a tune), burn (the house) → burn out (the house) are treated as reversible phrasal verbs. In other words, the meaning of the base verb and the derivative is almost the same or differ only slightly to a certain degree but in general it can be comprehended. Such combinations are the easiest for language learners to understand and learn 3. Reversible Vpv-s are characterized by the following criteria of reversibility as in the above presented examples (Klijūnait ÷, 2000:44): 1. morphological reversibility, i.e. Vpv-s have correlated base verbs from which they are derived; 2. semantic reversibility, i.e. Vpv-s form regular semantic oppositions with their base verbs; 3. syntactic reversibility, when the syntactic features of the base and the derivative are the same, i.e. if the base verb is transitive the derivative is transitive as well and vice versa; 4. lexical reversibility, i.e. Vpv-s and their formal correlates maintain the same lexical valency (have the same lexical meaning). However, if any of these conditions is broken, Vpv-s are non-reversible. In such cases the meaning is not clear and is not predictable. According to Longman’s dictionary about one- third of Vpv-s are non-reversible. If the Vpv does not maintain the reversibility conditions an individual development of meaning occurs and, in fact, this phenomenon is one of the stages of Vpv-s idiomatization of linguistic units, e.g. rock (a child in one’s arms) – rock out (in the disco) (Klijūnait ÷, 2000:45). The number and character of the types of reversibility determine

2 Webster’s online dictionary

3 Phrasal verbs. See: http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:UNjKJtujrDkJ:people.rit.edu/japnce/payne/teachers/phr asalverbs.html+semi-idiomatic+phrasal+verbs&cd=1&hl=lt&ct=clnk&gl=lt, accessed on 13 January 2011.

13 the number and character of the types of non-reversibility of Vpv-s. Further types of non- reversibility are reviewed in more detail (Klijūnait ÷, 2000:44-46): 1. Morphological non-reversibility . This type of non-reversibility presents Vpv-s that have no corresponding formal correlate, i.e. a base verb. Some of them have related denominatives, i.e. adjectives or nouns without direct derivational relations with them. The below presented table provides a number of examples of morphologically non-reversible Vpv-s which do not follow the derivational pattern V + pv → Vpv as their base verbs do not exist in the English language. Cf.: The non-reversible morphological The base verb which does not exist in the derivatives: English language dictionaries:

(1) rabbit on ‘to talk continuously for a long *to rabbit time in a boring or annoying way’ (L) e.g. I'm not going to stand around here listening to you rabbiting on. (L) (2) dish out ‘to serve food onto plates for a *to dish meal’ (L) e.g. Can you dish out the potatoes, please? (L) (3) eke out ‘to make a small supply of sth *to eke such as food or money last longer by using only small amounts of it’ (L) e.g. She managed to eke out her student loan till the end of the year. (L) (4) soup up ‘to make a car more powerful *to soup by making changes to its engine’ (L) e.g. Young men souped up their vehicles and raced along the dry lake beds around Los Angeles. (L) (5) cheese off ‘to be bored, annoyed, or *to cheese disappointed with something’ (L) e.g. What s wrong with David? He looks really cheesed off . (L) (6) spiff up ‘to improve someone or *to spiff something by making them look cleaner or more attractive’ (L)

14 e.g. Christine spent an hour spiffing herself up before her date with Robert on Friday night. (L)

2. Semantic non-reversibility . In the case of semantic non-reversibility the meaning of Vpv changes into an individual way and a semantic opposition with the verb and its base is not formed. We can not predict the meaning from the sum of the verb and the postverb’s meanings. In other words the idiomatic derivatives loose the relation with their base verbs from which they are derived. Cf.: (7) check ‘to examine sth to see if it is correct, safe or acceptable’ (Ox) – check in ‘to go to the desk at an airport in order to show your ticket and give them your bags to put on the plane’ (L) e.g. For international flights you'll need to check in two hours in advance. (L) (8) spin ‘to turn round and round quickly; to make sth do this’ (Ox) – spin off ‘to form a separate independent company from parts of an existing company’ (L) e.g. IBM intends to spin off its German manufacturing facilities into three subsidiaries. (L) (9) round ‘to make sth into a round shape; to form into a round shape’ (Ox) – round up ‘to search for and find a particular group of people and force them to go to prison’ (L) e.g. Police quickly rounded up dozens of suspected terrorists and threw them in jail. (L) (10) fall ‘to drop down from a higher level to a lower level’ (Ox) – fall out ‘to have an argument with someone and stop being friendly with them’ (L) e.g. Becker was depressed because he'd fallen out with his girlfriend. (L) (11) space ‘to arrange things so that they have regular spaces between them’ (Ox) – space out ‘someone who is spaced out cannot think clearly, for example because they have been taking drugs, or they feel very tired’ (L) e.g. That Saturday I was fine until the afternoon. Then I began to feel totally spaced out . (L) (12) take ‘to carry or move sth from one place to another’ (Ox) – take after ‘to be like your mother, father, grandfather etc, because you look like them, or because you have a similar character, or similar abilities’ (L) e.g. “You a good cook Paul?” “Of course he is. He takes after his dad, don't you Paul?” (L)

15 3. Syntactic non-reversibility . In the case of the syntactic non-reversibility, the lexical units experience some modifications; the features of Vpv-s change into an individual way or in other words, the transitive base verb becomes an intransitive Vpv in the process of derivation. Compare: (13) kiss (tr) ‘to touch sb with your lips as a sign of love, affection, sexual desire, etc., or when saying hello or goodbye’ (Ox) – kiss off (in) ‘it is used when you want to tell someone to go away or stop saying rude things’ (L) e.g. Go and kiss your mother goodnight (Ox) – Kiss off , Joe! If you can't say anything nice, then just shut up! (L) (14) black (tr) ‘to refuse to deal with goods or to do business with sb as a political protest’ (Ox) – black out (in) ‘to suddenly become unconscious’ (L) e.g. The unions have blacked all imports from the country (Ox) – The driver of the car had apparently blacked out at the wheel. (L) (15) stack (tr) ‘to arrange objects neatly in a pile; to be arranged in this way’ (Ox) – stack up (in) ‘to be in certain state; to measure, esp. in relation to an opponent; be worth (sth)’ (L) e.g. They had to stack all the boxes in three hours time (Ox) – The firm is stacking up pretty well these days. (L) However, the intransitive base verb becomes the transitive derivative. Cf.: (16) dwell (in) ‘to live somewhere’ (Ox) – dwell on/upon (tr) ‘to think or talk about something for too long, especially something that is unpleasant’ (L) e.g. For ten years she dwelled among the nomads of North America (Ox) – It doesn't do any good to dwell on the past – try to be more positive. (L) (17) run (in) ‘to move using your legs, going faster than when you walk’ (Ox) – run out (tr) ‘if you run out of something, you have no more of it left because you have used all of it’ (L) e.g. They turned and ran when they saw us coming (Ox) – The vehicle slowed and came to a halt. "We've run out of gas," said Vito. (L) (18) fit (in) ‘to be the right shape and size for sb/sth’ (Ox) – fit out (tr) ‘to provide someone or something with equipment, furniture, clothes etc’ (L) e.g. I tried the dress on but it didn’t fit (Ox) – The money we raise will be used for fitting out a new laboratory. (L)

4. Lexical non-reversibility. In this case the lexical combinability of Vpv-s is different than the related base verbs, having in mind the equivalent syntactic positions. In other words,

16 lexical non-reversible Vpv-s change semantic or lexical classes of their bases, therefore, the base verb and the derivative combine with the nouns of different semantic or lexical classes. The base verbs might combine with concrete nouns whilst the Vpv-s combine with abstract noun, e.g.: (19) gum ‘to spread glue on the surface of sth; to stick two things together with glue’ (e.g. a picture onto card ) (Ox) – gum up ‘to cause trouble in; spoil sth’ (L) e.g. Our holiday plans have been gummed up by bad weather. (L) (20) line ‘to mark with lines’ (e.g. lined paper ) (Ox) – line up ‘to provide or obtain (sth)’ (L) e.g. Will you be able to line up much support for your idea? (L) What is more, the base verbs might combine with inanimate things while the derivatives – with nouns denoting people and other living creatures. This type is the most frequent. Cf.: (21) carve ‘to form sth by cutting away material from wood or stone’ (e.g. a statue ) (Ox) – carve up ‘to overtake (someone) fast and dangerously in a car’ (L) e.g. Yes, he does get there sooner, but only by carving up the rest on the way. (L) (22) do ‘to perform an activity or a task’ (e.g. research ) (Ox) – do out ‘to make a room look nice by decorating it’ (L) e.g. The Itched 50 been done out nicely, with tiles and new units and everything. (L) (23) jack ‘to raise with or as with a jack’ (e.g. to jack a car ) (Ox) – jack up ‘to scold; find fault with (someone)’ (L) e.g. The director jacked Jim up for being late . (L) (24) peg ‘to fasten sth with pegs’ (e.g. wet cloths ) (Ox) – peg out (inf.) ‘to die’ (L) e.g. The poor old dog pegged out last week; he had lived to a ripe old age . (L) (25) key ‘to enter (data) by means of a keyboard’ (e.g. password ) (Ox) – key up ‘to make (a person) nervous or tense; excite’(L) e.g. We were all very keyed up before the big match .(L) Hence many phrasal verbs exhibit many different meanings which can vary from completely transparent to completely opaque. Because of this reason Vpv-s can be considered as reversible when they compose regular oppositions with their bases and do not contradict the four types of reversibility. Otherwise, if any of these conditions is broken, Vpv-s are non- reversible. The following chapter provides the information about the types of phrasal verbs semantic motivation.

17 5. TYPES OF PHRASAL VERBS SEMANTIC MOTIVATION

The motivation of Vpv-s is not only direct but also figurative. Vpv-s are understood as the result of the semantic motivation (derivation) (i.e. the transference of meaning) on the basis of the figurative (metaphoric or metonymic) development. Pik čilingis (2010:425) claims that words used figuratively depend on the twofold foundation, i.e. logical relation among things and their external and internal similarity. So, if the direct and the figurative derivational processes are joined together, the following pattern is obtained (Klij ūnait ÷, 2000: 47):

V + pv (word building) → Vpv 1 + (semantic motivation) → Vpv 2 In order to make Vpv figurative, firstly it undergoes the process of word building where a Vpv with the direct meaning is derived (i.e. attaching the postverb to the main verb). It is done according to the derivational pattern: V + pv → Vpv 1 (as it is shown in the first part of the model above), cf.: (26) pour ‘to make a liquid or other substance flow from a container in a

continuous stream, especially by holding the container at an angle’ (Ox) → pour out 1 ‘if you pour out a drink, you fill someone’s glass, cup etc with it’ (L) e.g. Pour the sauce over the pasta (Ox) → Mandy was pouring out tea and passing around biscuits. (L) In addition to word building, another step is semantic motivation where an additional or secondary change of meaning occurs according to the pattern: Vpv 1 + (semantic motivation)

→ Vpv 2, compare:

pour out 1 → pour out 2 ‘if you pour out your thoughts or feelings you tell someone everything about them, especially because you feel unhappy’ (L)

e.g. She came to see me that night and poured out all her troubles. (L) Vpv-s can be classified into groups according to the type of semantic motivation. If we look from the point of view of transference they are the following (Klij ūnait ÷, 2000:48, 50): 1. metaphoric Vpv-s; 2. metonymic Vpv-s. In the case of metaphoric Vpv-s, the word is used figuratively considering the similarities of things or phenomena (Pik čilingis, 2010:440). Metaphoric units appear at the end of a chain because of already mentioned derivational process, e.g.: (27) pump ‘to make water, air, gas, etc. flow in a particular direction by using a

pump or sth that works like a pump’ (Ox) → pump out 1 ‘to force a liquid or gas to

18 flow out of a place by using a special machine called a pump’ (L) → pump out 2 ‘to produce something continuously in large amounts’(L) e.g. Every year the city's industries and vehicles pump out five million tones of pollutants. (L) In the case of metonymic Vpv-s the transfer of meaning is based on one or another kind of logical relation among definitions (Pik čilingis, 2010:426), cf.: (28) beat ‘to hit sb/sth many times, usually very hard’ (Ox) → beat out ‘to make a fire stop burning by hitting it with something’(L) e.g. Heather seized a branch of a tree and began to beat out the flames. (L) We have briefly introduced the two types of figurative change of meaning. In the following chapters our attention will be paid on the material of the metaphoric and metonymic Vpv-s.

5.1. Metaphoric Phrasal Verbs

Oxford Advanced Learner’s Dictionary (2004) provides the definition that a metaphor is “a word or phrase used to describe sb/sth else, in a way that is different from its normal use, in order to show that the two things have the same qualities and to make the description more powerful”, for example: (29) open ‘to move a door, window, lid, etc. so that it is no longer closed’ (Ox) →

open out 1 ‘widen, broaden’ (L) → open out 2 ‘unfold, blossom; develop’(L) e.g. In the warmth of the room, the roses opened out in a few days. (L) Župerka (1997:60-61) defines metaphor as the transfer of lexical meaning of a word due to its similarity, i.e. the similarity of one phenomenon, denoted by the word, to another. The similarity ratio between the phenomena is very important because the metaphor appears when the phenomena are more different than similar (Ibid.). According to Gudavi čius (2007:165) metaphorization is the unique phenomenon. It reflects a person’s ability to see the similarities of real things. The goal of metaphors is to say more expressively and more effectively in order to make a bigger impression for the reader that he/she could realize the given information not only by mind but emotionally as well (Ibid.). Metaphor is the comparison of phenomena of reality, similarity of two images. Two components compose this structure: a) the theme – the thing compared;

19 b) the image or the object – the thing which the former is compared (Ibid.). Thus metaphor is some kind of ‘compact comparison’ or ‘hidden simile’, where the theme is not directly said, but guessable, grasped or intuitive (Pik čilingis 1975:277). Gudavi čius (2000:87) also adds that a ‘hidden simile’ is one of the essential means of recognition and that we recognize much while comparing. Cognitive linguistics understands metaphor not only as an essential feature of everyday speech usage but as means of understanding and thinking as well (Ibid.).

Compare more illustrations, where the final derivative Vpv 2, which is metaphoric, is semantically motivated by the intermediate link Vpv1, which is a reversible unit: (30) dig ‘to make a hole in the ground or to move soil from one place to another

using your hands, a tool or a machine’ (Ox) → dig up 1 ‘to remove something from

under the ground by digging’ (L) → dig up 2 ‘to find information by searching carefully’(L) e.g. When we investigated his background, we dug up some interesting facts. (L) (31) break ‘to be damaged and separated into two or more parts, as a result of force;

to damage sth in this way’ (Ox) → break into 1 ‘to enter a building by force, especially

in order to steal things’ (L) → break into 2 ‘to interrupt someone when they are talking or thinking’ (L) e.g. Christopher’s voice broke into her thoughts. (L)

(32) go ‘to move or travel from one place to another’ (Ox) → go out 1 ‘to leave your

house and go somewhere, especially to do something enjoyable’ (L) → go out 2 ‘to stop being fashionable at a particular time’ (L) e.g. That hairstyle went out about ten years ago. (L)

(33) lap → lap up 1 ‘to drink all of sth’ (L) → lap up 2 ‘to accept or receive sth’(L) e.g. It’s a terrible movie but audiences everywhere are lapping it up . (L) (34) wring ‘to twist and squeeze clothes, etc. in order to get the water out of them’

(Ox) → wring out 1 ‘to remove the liquid from a wet cloth or piece of clothing, by

twisting it tightly with your hands’ (L) → wring out 2 ‘to get information, money, an agreement etc from someone, but only with great difficulty, or by forcing them to give it’ (L) e.g. Carla was determined to win the case and wring every dollar she could out of her ex-husband. (L)

(35) run → run away 1 ‘leave rapidly; flee; escape’ (L) → run away 2 ‘to try to avoid dealing with a difficult or unpleasant situation’(L) e.g. You can’t keep running away from the problem . (L)

20 (36) hold up ‘to hold something in a high position, so that people can see it’ (L) → hold up ‘to remain strong or in a fairly good condition’ (L) e.g. There were fears that her ankle might not hold up for the competition. (L) Pik čilingis (2010:441, 1975:176) introduces the term TERTIUM COMPARATIONIS, or THE POINT OF SIMILARITY. According to it words compared share the common seme. In other words metaphors generate when the things that are compared have something in common, i.e. when the image and the theme coincide at least by one element, cf.: (37) conjure ‘to do clever tricks such as making things seem to appear or disappear

as if by magic’ (Ox) → conjure up 1 ‘to make sb/sth appear by using special magic

words’ (L) → conjure up 2 ‘to produce or make something very quickly and suddenly in a way that is surprising’ (L)

e.g. The man conjured up 1 a dove from his hat (L) → Grandma went into the kitchen,

and within minutes had conjured up 2 a delicious meal for everyone. (L) The very quick making of a meal (image) is compared to a very quick of appearance of a dove from a hat (theme). In this example the point of similarity is ‘ to appear as if by magic’ . Tertium comparationis is usually determined by similarity of a form, colour, appearance, sound, movement, impression, state, etc. the semantic link of the theme and the object is clear if any hesitation of perception is not caused, i.e. the perception of the meaning of figuratively used word exists and the point of similarity is observed, e.g. cook up ( a plan ). On the other hand, there are certain cases when the transfer of the name of the object is a subjective perception of associative relations between the phenomena. It is worth mentioning that in these cases the author sees some similarities between two phenomena as things or ideas can be chosen from absolutely different spheres (Pik čilingis, 1975:276, 281). What is more, Župerka (1997:60) use a term TROPE to talk about figurative meanings of words. Oxford Advanced Learner’s Dictionary (2004) provides the definition that trope is “a word or phrase that is used in a way that is different from its usual meaning in order to create a particular mental image or effect”. Pik čilingis (2010:422) states that the majority of words together with their main meanings have the variety of additional or secondary meanings and many semantic colours which become clear in a certain context or in coherent speech. Thus Gudavi čius (2007:182) distinguishes two types of metaphors: • conventional (usual) metaphors; • individual/ authorial (occasional) metaphors (i.e. tropes). Lakoff and Johnson (1980:139) define conventional metaphors as “metaphors that structure the ordinary conceptual system of our culture, which is reflected in our everyday language”. It is important to point out that speech metaphors, i.e. conventional metaphors, are

21 the result of primary nomination (Gudavi čius, 2007:183). Their predictability is apparent. For example: (38) round ‘to make sth into a round shape; to form into a round shape’ (Ox) → round out ‘to swell; grow fatter’ (L) e.g. She rounded her lips and whistled (Ox) → She was very thin after her illness, but she is rounding out nicely now. (L) (39) bottle ‘to put a liquid into a bottle’ (Ox) → bottle up ‘to keep a strong feeling such as anger, worry, or unhappiness hidden and not talk about it or show it’ (L) e.g. The wines are bottled after three years (Ox) → Writing the book was a way of expressing all the anger J'd been bottling up for years. (L) (40) serve ‘to give sb food or drink, for example at a restaurant or during a meal’ (Ox) → serve out ‘to continue doing something, until the end of a fixed period of time, especially the period of being a leader or being in prison’ (L) e.g. Serve the lamb with new potatoes and green beans (Ox) → The Hong Kong authorities many allow Stuchiner to serve out the remainder of his 10 year prison sentence in the Us. (L) (41) punch ‘to press buttons or keys on a computer, telephone, etc. in order to operate it’ (Ox) → punch out ‘to record the time that you leave work by putting a card into a special machine’ (L) e.g . I punched the button to summon the elevator (Ox) → The next day Lee punched out a little early, and met Bobby downtown. (L) (42) cork ‘to close a bottle with a cork’ (Ox) → cork down ‘to conceal, to restrain, repress’ (L) e.g. He took a bottle and suddenly corked it (Ox) → Mr. Pickwick bottled up his vengeance and corked it down . (L) On the contrary to the previous mentioned type, individual metaphors (tropes) are imaginative and creative. They occur outside conventional conceptual system and they give us a new understanding of our experience. “Thus, they can give new meaning to our pasts, to our daily activities, and to what we know and believe” (Ibid.). Gudavi čius (2007:182 – 183) adds that such metaphors can also be called “poetic” metaphors (ornamental) and they are the result of secondary or additional nomination. Compare the following instances: (43) timeline ‘a horizontal line that is used to represent time, with the past towards the left and the future towards the right (n)’ (Ox) → timeline out ‘to follow one character through time until another character appears (v)’ (L) e.g. In Faulkner’s Light in August, you can practically timeline out the characters . (L)

22 (44) dig ‘to make a hole in the ground or to move soil from one place to another using your hands, a tool or a machine’ (Ox) → dig out ‘to arrange’ (L) e.g. They dug deeper and deeper but still found nothing (Ox) → What I wanted you to do is to go to Washington and dig out this appointment to me. (L) (45) melt ‘to become or make sth become liquid as a result of heating’ (Ox) → melt away ‘to gradually disappear’ (L) e.g. The snow showed no sign of melting (Ox) → He laughed suddenly, and all the irritation in his face melted away . (L) (46) corkscrew ‘a device for removing corks from bottles’ (Ox) e.g. And I had work corkscrewing them out of old Atkinson, I can tell out . What is more, it is necessary to mention conceptual metaphors . According to Crystal (2006:80) a conceptual metaphor (or cognitive metaphor) is “a theory in which metaphor is viewed as performing an essential role in human language and cognition, encoding world- views in all forms of linguistic activity, including everyday conversation”. Lakoff and Johnson (1980:140) define it as a metaphor referring to one sphere (group of ideas) in terms of another. Gudavi čius (2007:183) claims that the conceptual domain from which we draw metaphorical expressions to understand another conceptual domain is known as the source domain . The conceptual domain that is understood in this way is the target domain (Ibid.). In metaphor we face a double evaluation: first of all, the given situation is evaluated, secondly, the beginning situation (thing, phenomenon) is recognized (Ibid.). Lakoff and Johnson (1980:3) examined that for the majority of people metaphor is a devise of poetic or extraordinary language but in fact “our ordinary conceptual system, in terms of which we both think and act, is fundamentally metaphorical in nature”. To illustrate this we will take a concept ARGUMENT and the conceptual metaphor: ARGUMENT IS WAR in sayings:

(47) e.g. Each proposal was shot down in flames; shoot down ‘to refuse even to consider something such as an idea or a plan’ (48) e.g. If you use that strategy, he’ll wipe you out . (L); wipe out ‘to defeat someone easily in a competition, election etc’ (L) (49) e.g. After a long debate, Darwin finally succeeded in winning Hooker round to his own way of thinking ; win round/around ‘to persuade someone to agree with you or do what you want, especially when they did not want to before’ (L) Here the speech is not only about arguments in terms of war. Many of things, done by us, in arguing are somehow structured by the concept of war. Even if there is no physical battle, the verbal battle occurs and the structure of an argument reflects this. The language of

23 argument is not fanciful, poetic, or rhetorical but it is literal. Thus metaphors as linguistic units are possible because metaphors exist in people’s conceptual everyday system (Lakoff and Johnson 1980:4-6). Compare more illustrations: TIME IS MONEY in sayings: (50) e.g. Long hours of working in the hotel kitchen had worn her out; wear out ‘to make someone feel extremely tired’ (L) (51) e.g. He'd better hurry up. We’re running out of time; run out ‘if you run out of something, you have no more of it left because you have used all of it’ (L) (52) e.g. Put aside some time for ping pong; put aside ‘to keep something for something else’ (L) (53) e.g. How many times do I have to spell it out for you?; spell out ‘to explain

something clearly and in detail’ (L) (54) e.g. We used up all our time given for preparation; use up ‘to use all of

something so that there is none left’ (L) From the examples given above it is obvious that time in our culture is a valuable thing. What is more, it is a limited recourse which is used by us to reach our purposes. Lakoff and Johnson (1980:14) call the above mentioned cases as structural metaphors , where, as it was mentioned, one concept is metaphorically explained in terms of another. The basis for extraordinarily wide variety of ontological metaphors , i.e. ways of viewing events, activities, emotions, ideas, etc, as entities and substances is provided by our experiences with physical objects. Consideration of nonphysical things as entities or substances does not allow us to guess very much about them. However ontological metaphors may be elaborated (Lakoff and Johnson, 1980:25). Compare the examples: THE MIND IS A MACHINE in examples as: (55) e.g. We’re still trying to grind out the solution to this question; grind out ‘to manage to do something with a lot of effort’ (L) (56) e.g. We’ve been working on this problem all day and now we’re running out of steam; run out ‘if you run out of something, you have no more of it left because you have used all of it’ (L) Furthermore, ontological metaphors are used to comprehend events, actions, activities and states. Actions and events are metaphorically conceptualized as objects, activities as substances and therefore as containers, and states as containers. Also, metaphors where the physical object is specified as being a person are, maybe, the most obvious ontological metaphors. In such a way wide variety of experiences with nonhuman entities in terms of human motivations, characteristics, and activities is comprehended. This phenomenon is

24 known as personification where something nonhuman is seen as human. Thus the following examples illustrating these cases are provided (Lakoff and Johnson, 1980:30 - 33): (57) e.g. Cancer finally caught up with him; catch up with ‘if something bad catches up with you, it starts to cause problems which you have been able to avoid for a period of time, but are now forced to deal with’ (L) (58) e.g. Inflation is eating up our profits; eat up ‘to eat all of something’ (L) Ontological metaphors are so natural and so easily reach our thoughts that they are often taken as self-evident, direct descriptions and thus most of us never think that they are metaphorical (Lakoff and Johnson, 1980:28). In the case of orientational metaphors , metaphors organize whole systems of concepts with respect to each other. Most of them deal with spatial orientation: up-down, in-out, etc. Also they have a basis in our physical experience. Consider the examples (Lakoff and Johnson, 1980:14 – 16): HAPPY IS UP/ GOOD IS UP in expressions as: e.g. I’m feeling up today. e.g. Things are looking up . SAD IS DOWN/ BAD IS DOWN in expressions like: e.g. I’m feeling really down . e.g. Things are looking rather down . Physical basis: erect status is viewed as a positive emotional state; and health, happiness and life – the things that totally characterize what is good for people – are all UP. However, drooping status usually goes together with sadness and depression; and all bad things and events are realized as DOWN (Ibid.). From the point of view of figurativeness, metaphor is one of the stylistic devices that lead to the figurative change in meaning. It is similarity which plays an important role in language. It is impossible not to mention metonymy when metaphor is being discussed. Thus the following chapter provides the material about another stylistic devise, i.e. metonymy.

5.2. Metonymic Phrasal Verbs

According to Lakoff (1990:77) metonymy is one of the main characteristics of cognition. It is especially common for people to take one well-understood or easy-to-perceive aspect of something and use it to stand either for the thing as a whole or for some other aspect or part of it.

25 A Russian linguist Galperin (1981:144) claims that “metonymy is based on a different type of relation between the dictionary and contextual meanings, a relation based not on identification, but on some kind of association connecting the two concepts which these meanings represent”. Metonymy is the transfer of the name or a specific relation between objects or phenomena. It is the association of contiguity on which the transfer is based. Župerka (1997:63) claims that such relations can be of sphere, time, cause, material, etc. In English phrasal verbs the postverb performing the function of the derivational means imparts the metonymic meaning, for example: (59) smoke ‘to suck smoke from a cigarette, pipe, etc. into your mouth and let it out again’ (Ox) → smoke out ‘to force (rats) to leave a hiding place by using smoke’ (L) e.g. If the rats won’t eat the poison or get caught in the traps, we may have to smoke them out with this special chemical that animals hate. (L) Smoke out (rats) is not the similarity that relates the base verb smoke with smoke out but their indirect connection. The postverb performing the function of the derivational means impart the metonymic meaning in these examples. Thus it is possible to make a scheme of formation of the metonymic Vpv as follows (Klij ūnait ÷, 2000:49): to force to leave + by means of smoking + out = to smoke out Lakoff and Johnson (1980:36) state that metaphors and metonymies are “different kinds of processes”. Metaphor is a way of conceiving of one thing in terms of another, and its primary function is understandable. Metonymy, however, has primarily a referential function, i.e., it allows us to use one entity to stand for another. But metonymy is not merely a referential device. It also serves the function of providing understanding (Ibid.). As a stylistic devise metaphor is more expressive that metonymy. This is because metaphor describes things we create in our minds, whilst metonymy reflects the relation between two things that exist in reality (Klij ūnait ÷, 2004:69). Still metonymy helps to emphasize the essential features of an object which is described and because of metonymy used in a text it is possible not to mention some things or facts that are already clear (Župerka, 1997:63). Compare more illustrations: (60) hiss ‘to say something in a low angry voice (Ox)’ → hiss off ‘to drive (a performer) off (the stage) by making disapproving hissing noise’ (L) to disapprove + by means of hissing + off → to hiss off e.g. After only five minutes, the actor was hissed off (the stage) by an angry crowd who demanded their money back. (L)

26 (61) flood ‘fill with water’ (Ox) → flood out ‘to be forced to leave your home because of floods’ (L) to make (sb) homeless + by means of flooding → to flood out e.g. The river burst its banks, and hundreds of Londoners were flooded out after the worst rain for twenty years. (L) (62) whistle ‘to make a tune or musical notes by forcing air through your mouth’ (Ox) → whistle up ‘to call (a dog) by whistling’ (L) to call + by means of whistling + up → to whistle up e.g. A man whistled the dog up when it ran away. (L) It is worth mentioning that a troublesome feature of the main stylistic figures – metaphor and metonymy arises, i.e. sometimes it is not easy to tell them apart, because the derivatives may be of both kinds metonymic or metaphoric (Klij ūnait ÷, 2004:69). For example: (63) sweat ‘if sth sweats, the liquid that is contained in it appears on its surface’ (Ox) → sweat out ‘to work hard and continuously for long periods, especially in hot conditions’ (L) e.g. At last, within the remaining three days, Henry sweated his paper out . (L) At first sight, it seems that it is a case of metonymy – to write + by means of writing + out → to sweat out . However, it is important to emphasize that sweating also has a metaphoric meaning ‘to work hard’. Thus they both correlate with each other as the result (i.e. sweating) and action (i.e. working hard). It is possible to say that the construction to sweat out the paper is a metaphor as well as a metonymy, or in other words, it could be called metaphoric-metonymy (Ibid.). Hence it is possible to draw a figure illustrating this case, cf.:

Write Sweat out the paper Metaphoric-metonymy Sweat

Metaphor Metonymy Work hard

Figure 2. Metaphoric-metonymy.

There exist cases when the postverb can perform the role of the derivational means in the formation of metonymic elliptical Vpv-s. They occur as the result of transposition (Klij ūnait ÷, 2000:49). In such cases the parts that are already understood are omitted. They narrow the expression (Župerka, 1997:63-64). For example:

27 (64) toss up ‘if two people or teams toss up for something, they decide who will do or have something by throwing a coin in the air, and trying to guess which side will be on top when it lands’ e.g. The captains usually toss up to see which team shall play first . (65) light ‘to make sth start to burn’ (Ox) → light up ‘light a cigarette, pipe etc and

begin to smoke it’ (L) e.g. You must not light up after the formal dinner until the Queen’s health has been drunk. (L) The metonymic Vpv toss up stands here for the verb with the object ‘ to toss a coin ’, where the object, i.e. coin is omitted, while in the metonymic Vpv light up the object cigarette is omitted. Moreover Lakoff and Johnson (1980:37 – 40) introduces conceptual metonymy. Metonymic concepts (as THE PART FOR THE WHOLE or PRODUCER FOR THE PRODUCT) are parts of everyday life and way of thinking and actions we do (Ibid.). Radden and Kovecses (1999:21, as cited in Panther and Thornburg, 2003:3) define metonymy as “a cognitive process in which one conceptual entity, the vehicle (also often called the ‘source’), provides mental access to another conceptual entity, the target, within the same cognitive model”. Such cognitive linguists as Lakoff (1987), Fauconnier and Turner (2002) emphasize that these cognitive processes, found in the interpretation of communicative acts, are usually absolutely spontaneous and automatic (Panther and Thornburg, 2003:18). Because of generally prevailing nounal metonymies, verbal ones are not so frequent. The ordinary relations of verbal metonymy are the following (Klij ūnait ÷, 2000): • action – sound correlation: (66) bark out ‘to shout something loudly and suddenly, especially an order’(L) to shout + by means of barking + out → to bark out e.g. The general began barking out orders to his staff. (L) (67) knock up ‘to wake sb by knocking’ (L) to wake + by means of knocking + up → to knock up e.g. I had to knock up the girl in the Post Office to find out where you lived and — here I am. (L) (68) clap out ‘to hit your hands together in order to produce a pattern of sound (rhythm)’ (L) to make rhythm + by means of clapping + out → to clap out e.g. My piano teacher always made me clap out the rhythm first before I tried to play a new tune. (L)

28 (69) click out ‘to switch off’ (L) to switch off + by means of clicking + out → to click out e.g. This time before leaving the office, she didn’t forget to click the computer out . (L)

• action and tool: (70) hammer out ‘to remove something with a hammer’(L) to remove + by means of hammering + out → to hammer out e.g. Can you hammer out these nails for me? I want the wood smooth to handle. (L) (71) rain off/out ‘if an event is rained off or rained out, it cannot take place or has to stop because there is too much rain’(L) to stop + by means of raining + off/out → to rain off/out e.g. Last night's match with Leeds United was rained off . (L) (72) smoke out ‘to force (rats) to leave a hiding place by using smoke’ (L) to leave + by means of smoking + out → to smoke out e.g. If the rats won’t eat the poison or get caught in the traps, we may have to smoke them out with this special chemical that animals hate. (L)

• action and result: (73) shake up ‘to mix (something such as liquid) by shaking; shake (a bottle) to mix its contents’(L) to mix + by means of shaking + up → to shake up e.g. Shake up the medicine before drinking it. (L) (74) beat out ‘to extinguish (the fire) by beating’ (L) to extinguish + by means of beating + out → to beat out e.g. She beat out the flames with a branch . (L) (75) beat up ‘to mix something by beating’(L) to mix + by means of beating + up → to beat up e.g. Beat up the eggs before you add the flour. (L) (76) struggle out ‘to leave a place, with difficulty’(L) to leave + by means of struggling + out → to struggle out e.g. One by one, the insects struggled out of the smoke-filled hole . (L)

• action and smell: (77) smell out ‘to find (something or someone) by smelling’(L) to find + by means of smell/ smelling + up → to smell out

29 e.g. Dogs are used to smell out unlawful drugs which travelers are carrying . (L) (78) scent out ‘to find (something or someone) by or as by smell or noticing signs’(L) to find + by means of smell/ smelling + up → to scent out e.g. The police were able in the end to scent out the criminals’ hiding place . (L) (79) stink up/out ‘to fill a place with a very unpleasant smell’(L) to fill + by means of stinking + up/out → to stink up/out e.g. There was some old fish in the bin which had stunk up the whole kitchen. (L) (80) nose out ‘to find (something) by smell’(L) to find + by means of smell/ smelling + up → to nose out e.g. Our dog will nose out a rabbit anywhere it hides . (L) (81) smoke up ‘to fill sth with smoke’(L) to fill + by means of smoke/ smoking + up → to smoke up e.g. Open the window, the committee have smoked the whole room up . (L) Metonymy serves some of the aims that metaphor does, however it allows us to pay more attention on certain features of what is being referred to. Metonymy is not a rhetorical or poetic device in language. As it was already mentioned metonymic concepts appear in ordinary way and life (Lakoff and Johnson, 1980:37). Metonymic concepts like the above mentioned ones are systematic in the same way that conceptual metaphors are. They are illustrations of certain general conceptual metonymies, in terms of which we organize our actions and thoughts. The conceptualization of one thing by means of its relation to something else is provided by metonymic concepts (Lakoff and Johnson, 1980:39). Thus, not only our language is structured by metonymies but our thoughts, attitudes, and actions as well. Metonymic concepts, as well as metaphoric, are grounded in our experience. “In fact, the grounding of metonymic concepts is in general more obvious than is the case with metaphoric concepts, since it usually involves direct physical or casual associations” (Ibid.). Metonymic derivatives, which make a group of non-reversible Vpv-s, have been briefly discussed. This stylistic devise is not considered as expressive as metaphor because of association of contiguity and relations between objects or phenomena that do exist in reality.

30 CONCLUSIONS

The purpose of our paper was to examine idiomatic English phrasal verbs and the theory related to them. Thus, the following conclusions have been drawn: 1) Phrasal verbs have been treated as derivational units which are derived according to the pattern V + pv → Vpv, for example black out ‘to suddenly become unconscious’. Despite the three cases of derivation, addition of postverbs to the verbs acts as the derivational process. The postverb performs not only the role of a derivative constituent, but as an element which may lead to the slight or considerable alterations of the meaning of the derivative. 2) In the process of derivation reversible phrasal verbs form regular oppositions with verbs at their base. The meaning of the derivative in general can be comprehended, e.g. Take these cookies and share them out . What is more, the criteria of reversible Vpv-s have been distinguished, i.e. morphological, semantic, syntactic and lexical. However, there are Vpv-s that do not form regular semantic oppositions with their bases. In such cases the meaning is not clear and is not predictable. Such Vpv-s are known as non-reversible, e.g. She ran up a dress in an hour on that machine . Furthermore, corresponding to the reversible criteria non-reversible Vpv-s have been distinguished. 3) While discussing the types of phrasal verbs semantic motivation, the following types were revealed in our paper: • Metaphoric phrasal verbs, e.g. She came to see me that night and poured out all her troubles. • Metonymic phrasal verbs, e.g. A man whistled the dog out when it ran away . Also we have briefly discussed authorial metaphors (tropes), e.g. corkscrew out and conceptual metaphors, e.g. ARGUMENT IS WAR, which are explained by means of other sayings. Furthermore, we have briefly analyzed metaphoric metonymies as sweat out (a paper), elliptical metonymies, e.g. toss up , where the object coin is omitted, and such metonymic relations as action – sound correlation. 4) While analyzing the theory and types of phrasal verbs 81 examples were picked to illustrate the theoretical issues. Phrasal verbs are of great importance in the English language because they are used in everyday English. Understanding and learning to use phrasal verbs is often pretty problematic. On the other hand, though they are difficult to learn and remember, they colour the speaker’s language and make it richer.

31 REFERENCES

1. Cowie, A.P. & Mackin, R. 1975. Oxford Dictionary of Current Idiomatic English . Oxford University Press. 2. Galperin, I. R. 1981. Stylistics . “ Высшая школ a” Press. 3. Gudavi čius, A. 2000/ 2009. Etnolingvistika . Šiauliai. 4. Gudavi čius, A. 2007. Gretinamoji semantika . Šiauliai. 5. Klijūnait ÷, I. 2000. Linguistic Status of English Phrasal Verbs . Siauliai University Press. 6. Klijūnait ÷, I. 2004. Field Structures in the Lexico-semantic System of Language . Siauliai University Press. 7. Kosur, H. M. 2009. The Form, Origin, and Types of Verb-Particle Combinations in English . 8. Lakoff, G. & Johnson, M. 1980. Metaphors We Live By. The University of Chicago Press. 9. Lakoff, G. 1990. Women, Fire and Dangerous Things . The University of Chicago Press. 10. Panther, K.U. & Thornburg L. L. 2003. Metonymy and Pragmatic Inferencing. Germany. 11. Pikčilingis, J. 1975. Lietuvi ų kalbos stilistika . Vilnius: Mokslas. 12. Pikčilingis, J. 2010. Stilistikos darb ų rinktin ÷. Vilnius: Mokslo ir enciklopedij ų leidybos centras. 13. Plag, I. 2003. Word-formation in English . Cambridge University Press. 14. Waibel, B. 2007. Phrasal verbs in learner English: A corpus-based study of German and Italian students. Albert-Ludwigs-Universität, Freiburg. 15. Villavicencio, A. 2002. Verb-Particle Constructions and Lexical Resources. Cambridge University Press. 16. Župerka, K. 1983. Lietuvi ų Kalbos Stilistika . “Mokslas” Press.

DICTIONARIES

1. Crystal, D. 2006. A dictionary of linguistics and Phonetics . Blackwell publishing. 2. Longman Basic English Dictionary . 2002. New York Press. 3. Longman Phrasal Verbs Dictionary , 2000. Essex: Pearson Education Limited. 4. Oxford Advanced Learner‘s Dictionary - 7th edition . 2004. 5. Oxford Advanced Learner’s Encyclopedic Dictionary .1993. Oxford University Press. 6. Webster’s online dictionary . Available from: http://www.merriam- webster.com/dictionary/.

WEBSITES

1. Definition of BASE. Accessed on 12 November 2010, available from: http://grammar.about.com/od/ab/g/baseverbterm.htm 2. Phrasal Verbs. Accessed on 13 January 2011, available from: http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:UNjKJtujrDkJ:people.rit.edu/jap nce/payne/teachers/phrasalverbs.html+semi- idiomatic+phrasal+verbs&cd=1&hl=lt&ct=clnk&gl=lt