Phrasal Verb Indeterminacy

Halliday (1994: 210): 

Phrasal Verb As Predicator + Adjunct

Halliday (1994: 209):

Phrasal Verb In Transitivity And Mood Structure

Halliday (1994: 209):

Pronoun Goals With Phrasal Verbs

Halliday (1994: 209):

Why Phrasal Verbs Are Preferred

Halliday (1994: 208-9):

A Phrasal Verb Is A Single Process

Halliday (1994: 208):

Phrasal Verbs As Lexical Items

Halliday (1994: 208):

Phrasal Verbs

Halliday (1994: 207):

The Event Is Not A Element Of The Logical Structure

Halliday (1994: 207):

Difficulties In Identifying Circumstances: Preposition Attached To A Verb

Halliday (1994: 159-60):

The Taxonomic Limitations Of Processes

Halliday & Matthiessen (1999: 265):

Processes are realised by verbal groups, where, typically, the only lexical material is the verb itself, functioning as Event (material action or event, conscious or verbal process, or relation). Apart from the adverbial complement of a phrasal verb, which may serve to construct a distinct lexical item e.g. make out (I can't make out the difference), come to (she'll come to in a minute), let on (don't let on about this), &c., all contrasts made by the verbal group are grammatical ones — tense and other quasi-temporal systems, and modality. There is no lexical expansion classifying processes into taxonomies or assigning them sets of contrasting qualities.

Blogger Comments:

Importantly, although a Process is realised by a phrasal verb, the 'adverbial complement' of a phrasal verb is not a constituent of the verbal group.

Why Many Prepositional Complements Have The Potential To Become Subject

Halliday & Matthiessen (2014: 424):

… prepositional Complements increasingly tend to have the same potential for becoming Subject, as in this floor shouldn’t be walked on for a few days.  No doubt one reason for this tendency has been the lexical unity of phrasal verbs; because look up to is a single lexical item, with a one-word near-synonym admire, it is natural to parallel people have always looked up to her with she’s always been looked up to.

Allerton's ‘Stretched Verb Constructions’ vs Phrasal Verbs

Halliday & Matthiessen (2014: 417-9):

As we have shown above, there are three types of phrasal verb: verb plus preposition, verb plus adverb or verb plus both. We can also note combinations verbs with nouns such as

Taking account of …
… to pay more attention to …
… ran great risks …

Such combinations are investigated by Allerton (2002) under the heading of ‘stretched verb constructions’. However, while it can be argued that these are also lexicalised verbs, just as phrasal verbs, ‘stretched verbs’ can still be accommodated in terms the transitivity patterns of the clause. They involve combinations of Process + Range, e.g. take + account of, pay + attention (to), run + risk, reach + conclusion, or Process + abstract circumstance of Place, e.g. put + at risk, come + to an end, arrive + at conclusion. The lexical verb serving as the Event of the verbal group functioning as Process tends to be fairly general, and the lexical content is represented by the noun serving as Thing in the nominal group functioning as Range in the clause, or in the prepositional phrase serving as Place. There tend to be collocational combinations of verb and noun, as illustrated by the examples above; compare also wreak + havoc, tender + resignation, lend + support. This noun is often a nominalisation of a verb, as with attention, conclusion, which reflects the fact that ‘stretched verb constructions’ embody grammatical metaphor. Like other instances of grammatical metaphor, clauses with ‘stretched verb constructions’ can thus be given more than one analysis, as illustrated in Figure 6-23. 

Diagnostic For Phrasal Verbs

Halliday & Matthiessen (2014: 417):

There will often be doubt about whether these complex lexical items can be interpreted grammatically as a single Process or not. In such cases it is important to consider the transitivity of the clause as a whole, to see whether it appears to be structured as process plus participant or process plus circumstance. Thematic variation often shows a preference one way or the other.

Phrasal Verb In Transitivity And Mood Structure

Halliday & Matthiessen (2014: 417-8):

Figure 6-21 gives the analysis of a clause with a phrasal verb of the adverbial type (i) in it, in terms of (a) transitivity and (b) mood. Similarly with the prepositional type (ii): in I’m looking for a needle, the mood constituents are looking Predicator, for a needle Adjunct, and this accounts for the ordering relative to other Adjuncts, e.g. I’ve looked everywhere for a needle. The third type includes some where both adverb and preposition are (or may be) part of the Process, e.g. look out for, put up with, put in for; and others where only the adverb is within the Process, e.g. let in for, put up to, as in he let me in for it, he put me up to it.

Why Pronominal Goals Usually Occur Within Phrasal Verbs

Halliday & Matthiessen (2014: 417):

This also explains something that is often presented as an arbitrary rule of English, but is in fact anything but arbitrary: that if the Goal is a pronoun it almost always occurs within the phrasal verb (they called it off rather than they called off it). This is part of the same story; a pronoun is hardly ever newsworthy, since it refers to something that has gone before, so if the Goal is a pronoun it is virtually certain that the Process will be under focus. (But not quite; the pronoun may be contrastive, and if so it can come finally, e.g. they rang up me, but apparently nobody else.)

Why Phrasal Verbs Have Flourished In Modern English

Halliday & Matthiessen (2014: 416):

The grammar enables us to explain why phrasal verbs have evolved to the extent that they have done in modern English. The leading edge is formed by those of type (i), the adverbial ones, which are particularly widely spread. Typically these have non-phrasal, one-word synonyms, or near-synonyms; yet the phrasal form tends to be preferred, and is strongly favoured in the spoken language. Why is this?

Suppose we have a two-participant clause, active in voice, in which the main item of news is the Goal. The Goal comes at the end, and this is where the prominence – the information focus – typically falls. We can express the process either phrasally or nonphrasally – there is nothing very much to choose between the two:

they cancelled the meeting      they called off the meeting

Suppose however that I want the focus of information to be the Process rather than the Goal. At this point a significant difference arises. If I say

they cancelled the meeting

the result is that the information focus is now non-final; this is a marked, strongly foregrounded option, and therefore carries additional overtones of contrast, contradiction or unexpectedness. I may not want these overtones; but the only way I can avoid them is to leave the focus unmarked – i.e. at the end. This means that the Process, not the Goal, must come last. … but in English it is impossible – I cannot say they the meeting cancelled – unless the Process is split into two parts. This, therefore, is what happens, with a phrasal verb: it splits the Process into two parts, one functioning as Predicator and the other as Adjunct, with the Adjunct coming in its normal place at the end:

they called the meeting off

Thematic Argument For Interpreting A Phrasal Verb As A Single Process

Halliday & Matthiessen (2014: 415-6):

The experiential configuration [i.e. phrasal verb serving as single Process] is reflected in the thematic variation. If the prepositional phrase for a needle was a circumstantial element it should be able to be thematised; but we do not say for that I’ll look; the more likely form is that I’ll look for. Similarly with the adverbial ones: see off is a single process, so whereas we would say there I’ll see John (= I’ll see John there but with there instead of I as Theme), there is no form off I’ll see John thematically related to I’ll see John off.

Phrasal Verbs Of Motion

Halliday & Matthiessen (2014: 414):

As the examples illustrate, verbs of motion are phased temporally to indicate durative motion (‘continue to go’) and spatially to indicate directed motion (‘go’ + direction). With the second type, the verb often denotes some specific manner of motion such as flit and clamber in the examples above; the phrasal verb thus makes it possible to combine manner and direction: verb [manner] + adverb [direction]. Similar patterns are found in languages with ‘serial verb constructions’ and ‘verb compounding’. Direction occurs naturally with motion, of course; but it may also be used as a phasal extension verbs of other kinds, as with direction of perception:

Frodo and Sam gazed out in mingled loathing and wonder on this hateful land.

Blogger Comments:

To be clear, on grammatical criteria, gaze and gaze out serve as behavioural Processes, not mental Processes of perception.  For example, neither affords a Phenomenon — * gaze (out) this hateful land — but instead, like some other behavioural Processes, can take a Location circumstance that indicates the orientation of the behaviour, such as gaze (out) on this hateful land.

Less Prototypical Phrasal Verbs

Halliday & Matthiessen (2014: 414n):

Note that a number of the items functioning as spatial adverbs can also serve as prepositions; cf. they clambered down and the[y] clambered down the hill. These combinations of verb of motion + adverb of place are less like prototypical phrasal verbs in that the adverb can be treated textually in the same way as a circumstance of Place: down they clambered, it was down that they clambered.