No problem is so big or so complicated that it can’t be run away from
I run away from the problem -> The problem is run away from.
I take care of the problem -> The problem is taken care of.
I run away from the problem -> * From the problem is run away.
I run from school -> From school I run -> *School is run from.
I take away the apple -> Away the apple is taken
I come from China -> From China I come -> *China is come from.
I run away from China -> Away from China I run -> ?? China is ran away from
(((I (run away)) (from (the problem)))
–> Where do (((I (run away) (from __))?
–> (From _where_) do ((I (run away)?
–?–> Away (from _where_) do (I run)?
(I solved (the problem))
–> (The problem) is _I_ solved _x__
(((I (run away) (from (the problem)))
-??-> (The problem) is (( _I_ (run away) (from _x_).
I ran from the North –> ?? North is run from
I ran with fear –> * Fear is run with
I ran on Sunday -> *Sunday is run on.
But this feels ok
I ran on the sidewalk -> The sidewalk is run on.
(but still can´t give up)
´No problem is so big or so complicated that it can´t be run away from.´ C Linus
I am copying some of my own comments and afterthoughts here:
Could it be that when a verb-preposition combinatin is frequent and idiomatic, they feel like a single verb (there may even be a single transitive verb synonym) and move together?
“run away from = avoid” might be one
“get back to = retarliate”: I got back to him -> He was gotton back to.
“take home with = remember”, …
Unidiomatic ones, or maybe those that do not have single-verb substitutes, do not apply? Does not seem to be the case:
I jump on the box -> the box is jumped on.
I jump over the box -> The box is jumped over
I hit against the box -> The box is hit against
But:
I jump from the box -> ? the box is jumped from.
I jump below the box ->* the box is jumped below.
I jump above the box -> ? the box if jumped above
I jump beside the box -> * the box is jumped beside
Or, maybe some prepositions just sound good to end a sentence with, like “over”, “against”, “from”, but others just sound bad, such as “below”, “above” …
Mark Liberman had a LanguageLog post back in April 11, 2004 (http://itre.cis.upenn.edu/%7Emyl/languagelog/archives/000743.html) on “stranded prepositions”:
“Preposition stranding” refers to cases where the object of a preposition has apparently “moved” to some other location in the sentence, leaving the preposition “stranded”. It´s easy to google up some examples:
1. I am grateful to the women I have spoken to [ ] since the operation
2. Her father had a similar problem that he simply lived with [ ].
3. My great-grandfather was a collector of comics and baseball cards, which we used to fight over [ ].
4. Where does bacon come from [ ]?
5. Which analysts is he talking about [ ]?
These examples are relative clauses or questions where a questioned word or the head of a relative clause is implicitly related to a sort of “silent pronoun” (indicated by open square brackets in the examples above) following a preposition that has been “stranded” in its expected place in the clause.
[Note that preposition stranding occurs in other constructions as well, such as passives: “The region was fought over [ ] by Sweden and Russia for centuries”; and “hollow clauses”: “The customer service department was difficult to deal with [ ]”. ]
In the relative clauses and questions, an alternative would be to “move” the preposition to be adjacent to the fronted question word or relative pronoun. Here are the same five examples with fronted prepositions — note that the relative pronoun (here whom or which) might have to be added, since it may otherwise be omitted:
1a. I am grateful to the women to whom I have spoken [ ] since the operation
2a. ?Her father had a similar problem with which he simply lived [ ].
3a. ?My great-grandfather was a collector of comics and baseball cards, over which we used to fight [ ].
4a. From where does bacon come [ ]?
5a. About which analysts is he talking [ ]?
Haj Ross named this process “pied piping”, conjuring an image of the wh-word luring the preposition out of its original position, just as the Pied Piper lured the rats and children out of Hamelin. Preposition-stranding is scorned by some prescriptivists, even though it has been used by well-respected writers for centuries.
The focus of Mark´s post was on the history of this ´rule.´ His point — that preposition stranding is part of standard English — is well-taken, but my confusion here is whether there are further constraints that make some cases (see above) sound alertingly strange while others go unnoticed.
Posted by: Gary Feng on June 30, 2004 11:13 AM
June 29th, 2004 at 4:56 pm e
Could it be that when a verb-preposition combinatin is frequent and idiomatic, they feel like a single verb (there may even be a single transitive verb synonym) and move together?
“run away from = avoid” might be one
“get back to = retarliate”: I got back to him -> He was gotton back to.
“take home with = remember”, …
Unidiomatic ones, or maybe those that do not have single-verb substitutes, do not apply? Does not seem to be the case:
I jump on the box -> the box is jumped on.
But:
I jump from the box -> ? the box is jumped from.
Or
I jump below the box ->* the box is jumped below.
I jump above the box -> ? the box if jumped above
I jump beside the box -> * the box is jumped beside
I jump over the box -> The box is jumped over
I hit against the box -> The box is hit against
Or, maybe some prepositions just sound good to end a sentence with, like “over”, “against”, “from”, but others just sound bad, such as “below”, “above” …
June 30th, 2004 at 11:13 am e
Mark Liberman had a LanguageLog post back in April 11, 2004 (http://itre.cis.upenn.edu/%7Emyl/languagelog/archives/000743.html) on “stranded prepositions”:
:
“Preposition stranding” refers to cases where the object of a preposition has apparently “moved” to some other location in the sentence, leaving the preposition “stranded”. It’s easy to google up some examples:
1. I am grateful to the women I have spoken to [ ] since the operation
2. Her father had a similar problem that he simply lived with [ ].
3. My great-grandfather was a collector of comics and baseball cards, which we used to fight over [ ].
4. Where does bacon come from [ ]?
5. Which analysts is he talking about [ ]?
These examples are relative clauses or questions where a questioned word or the head of a relative clause is implicitly related to a sort of “silent pronoun” (indicated by open square brackets in the examples above) following a preposition that has been “stranded” in its expected place in the clause.
[Note that preposition stranding occurs in other constructions as well, such as passives: “The region was fought over [ ] by Sweden and Russia for centuries”; and “hollow clauses”: “The customer service department was difficult to deal with [ ]”. ]
In the relative clauses and questions, an alternative would be to “move” the preposition to be adjacent to the fronted question word or relative pronoun. Here are the same five examples with fronted prepositions — note that the relative pronoun (here whom or which) might have to be added, since it may otherwise be omitted:
1a. I am grateful to the women to whom I have spoken [ ] since the operation
2a. ?Her father had a similar problem with which he simply lived [ ].
3a. ?My great-grandfather was a collector of comics and baseball cards, over which we used to fight [ ].
4a. From where does bacon come [ ]?
5a. About which analysts is he talking [ ]?
Haj Ross named this process “pied piping”, conjuring an image of the wh-word luring the preposition out of its original position, just as the Pied Piper lured the rats and children out of Hamelin. Preposition-stranding is scorned by some prescriptivists, even though it has been used by well-respected writers for centuries.
His point — that preposition stranding is part of standard English — is well-taken, but my confusion here is whether only a certain cases are allowed while others may sound stange.