English Grammar

phrasal verbs

AhQ ['a: kiu]

User since 2006
Posts: 2715

28 Feb. 2008

Some phrasal verbs are told separable, other are not.
If a transitive verb is said separable, I think it means that the direct or indirect object of the verb comes before the particle.
example with to take out.
I take some coins out of my pocket.
Philip takes her dates out to town.
We couldn't say: I take out some coins or Philipe takes out her dates. Oh my!

Notwithstanding I read in my Robert & Collins that to reach out is a transitive separable verb. To my mind I should say: I reach my hand out for the cup. Although the dico puts forward: "he reached out his hand for the cup". I guess it's a matter of habit and that rules in English are loose.
Is it possibly the influence of a new meaning of "reach out" that is to go close to people for help and social assistance?
So, I read in a American zine "Former senator... has been tasked with reaching out to lawmakers." (= to approach lawmakers)- "Conservatives are reaching out to critics." "Reaching out, though, is not pandering."

And what about a particle jumping from behind to before the verb? To outreach, vi or vt, comes from "reach out". Demands outreach offers. He outreached his hand for the cup.
Outreach worker (dealing with local community services).

Isn't that kind of a mess?
Who could put things straight here?
Thanks in advance.
Sandy

Some phrasal verbs are told separable, other are not. 
 If a transitive verb is said separable, I think it means that the direct or indirect object of the verb comes before the particle. 
 example with to take out. 
 I take some coins out of my pocket. 
 Philip takes her dates out to town. 
 We couldn't say: I take out some coins or Philipe takes out her dates. Oh my!  
 
 
 Notwithstanding I read in my Robert & Collins that to reach out is a transitive separable verb. To my mind I should say: I reach my hand out for the cup. Although the dico puts forward: "he reached out his hand for the cup". I guess it's a matter of habit and that rules in English are loose. 
 Is it possibly the influence of a new meaning of "reach out" that is to go close to people for help and social assistance? 
 So, I read in a American zine "Former senator... has been tasked with reaching out to lawmakers." (= to approach lawmakers)- "Conservatives are reaching out to critics." "Reaching out, though, is not pandering."  
 
 
 And what about a particle jumping from behind to before the verb? To outreach, vi or vt, comes from "reach out". Demands outreach offers. He outreached his hand for the cup. 
 Outreach worker (dealing with local community services).  
 
 
 Isn't that kind of a mess? 
 Who could put things straight here? 
 Thanks in advance. 
 Sandy

2 comments

AhQ ['a: kiu]
User since 2006
Posts: 2715
28 Feb. 2008

Some phrasal verbs are told separable, other are not.
If a transitive verb is said separable, I think it means that the direct or indirect object of the verb comes before the particle.
example with to take out.
I take some coins out of my pocket.
Philip takes her dates out to town.
We couldn't say: I take out some coins or Philipe takes out her dates. Oh my!

Notwithstanding I read in my Robert & Collins that to reach out is a transitive separable verb. To my mind I should say: I reach my hand out for the cup. Although the dico puts forward: "he reached out his hand for the cup". I guess it's a matter of habit and that rules in English are loose.
Is it possibly the influence of a new meaning of "reach out" that is to go close to people for help and social assistance?
So, I read in a American zine "Former senator... has been tasked with reaching out to lawmakers." (= to approach lawmakers)- "Conservatives are reaching out to critics." "Reaching out, though, is not pandering."

And what about a particle jumping from behind to before the verb? To outreach, vi or vt, comes from "reach out". Demands outreach offers. He outreached his hand for the cup.
Outreach worker (dealing with local community services).

Isn't that kind of a mess?
Who could put things straight here?
Thanks in advance.
Sandy
Some phrasal verbs are told separable, other are not. If a transitive verb is said separable, I think it means that the direct or indirect object of the verb comes before the particle. example with to take out. I take some coins out of my pocket. Philip takes her dates out to town. We couldn't say: I take out some coins or Philipe takes out her dates. Oh my! Notwithstanding I read in my Robert & Collins that to reach out is a transitive separable verb. To my mind I should say: I reach my hand out for the cup. Although the dico puts forward: "he reached out his hand for the cup". I guess it's a matter of habit and that rules in English are loose. Is it possibly the influence of a new meaning of "reach out" that is to go close to people for help and social assistance? So, I read in a American zine "Former senator... has been tasked with reaching out to lawmakers." (= to approach lawmakers)- "Conservatives are reaching out to critics." "Reaching out, though, is not pandering." And what about a particle jumping from behind to before the verb? To outreach, vi or vt, comes from "reach out". Demands outreach offers. He outreached his hand for the cup. Outreach worker (dealing with local community services). Isn't that kind of a mess? Who could put things straight here? Thanks in advance. Sandy
Pootle
User since 2008
Posts: 3
6 March 2008

Hi Sandy,
You CAN say 'I take some coins out of my pocket'. The problem only starts when you use pronouns: you can say 'I take them out' but you can't say 'I take out them'.

'He takes her out' is ok, but not 'he takes out her'.

Pootle
Hi Sandy, You CAN say 'I take some coins out of my pocket'. The problem only starts when you use pronouns: you can say 'I take them out' but you can't say 'I take out them'. 'He takes her out' is ok, but not 'he takes out her'. Pootle

New comment

Please sign in to leave a comment.