A study on some phrasal verbs in business texts in english from cognitive semantic perspective

NGÔ THỊ VIỆT ANHA STUDY ON SOME PHRASAL VERBS IN BUSINESS TEXTS IN ENGLISH FROM COGNITIVE SEMANTIC PERSPECTIVE NGHIÊN CỨU NGHĨA CỦA MỘT SỐ CỤM ĐỘNG TỪ TIẾNG ANH TRONG NGỮ CẢNH TIẾNG ANH

NGÔ THỊ VIỆT ANH

A STUDY ON SOME PHRASAL VERBS IN BUSINESS TEXTS IN ENGLISH FROM COGNITIVE SEMANTIC PERSPECTIVE

(NGHIÊN CỨU NGHĨA CỦA MỘT SỐ CỤM ĐỘNG TỪ TIẾNG ANH TRONG NGỮ CẢNH TIẾNG ANH KINH TẾ DƯỚI GÓC ĐỘ NGỮ NGHĨA

TRI NHẬN)M.A Minor Thesis

Field : English LinguisticsCode: 602215

Hanoi, October 2010

DEPARTMENT OF POSTGRADUATE STUDIES

NGÔ THỊ VIỆT ANH

A STUDY ON SOME PHRASAL VERBS IN BUSINESS TEXTS IN ENGLISH FROM COGNITIVE SEMANTIC PERSPECTIVE

(NGHIÊN CỨU NGHĨA CỦA MỘT SỐ CỤM ĐỘNG TỪ TIẾNG ANH TRONG NGỮ CẢNH TIẾNG ANH KINH TẾ DƯỚI GÓC ĐỘ NGỮ

NGHĨA TRI NHẬN)M.A Minor Thesis

Field : English LinguisticsCode: 602215

Supervisor: Dr Hà Cẩm Tâm

Hanoi, October 2010

ESP: English for Specific Purposes

VPC: Verb Particle Construction

AOF: Academy of Finance

* : denote examples taken from online sources

Declaration ………

Acknowledgements………

Abstract ………

Abbreviations and Symbols………

Table of Contents………

INTRODUCTION………

I. Rationale of the study………

AI. Aims of the study………

BI. Scope of the study………

IV Organization of the study………

DEVELOPMENT………

CHAPTER I: THEORETICAL BACKGROUND………

1.1 Background on Cognitive Linguistics………

1.2 Background on Cognitive Semantics………

1.2.1 Embodiment and conceptual structure ………

1.2.2 Metaphors and metonymy………

1.2.2.1 Metaphors……… ……….

1.2.2.2 Mappings……….

1.2.3.Image schemas………

1.2.4.Trajector and Landmark……….

1.2.5.Perspective and Construal ……….

1.3 An overview of English phrasal verbs and English particles…………

1.3.1 Phrasal verbs………

1.3.1.1.Definitions of phrasal verbs………

1.3.1.2.Some main types of phrasal verbs………

1.3.2 Particles ……… ………

1.4 Phrasal Verbs in terms of Cognitive Semantics……….………

CHAPTER II: THE STUDY… ……….

2.1 Research Questions ……… ………

I ii iii iv v 1 1 2 2 2 4 4 4 5 7 7 8 10 11 12 12 13 13 13 14 15 16 18 18

2.3 Data……… 19

2.4 Analytical Framework……… 19

2.5.Data Analysis, Findings and Discussion……… 22

2.5.1 Meanings of Phrasal Verbs with Up and Path Metaphor………… 22

2.5.1.1.Up as a Path moving vertically 22

2.5.1.2.Up as a PATH into visual/perceptual field 23

2.5.1.3.Up as a PATH into mental field 24

2.5.1.4.Up as a PATH into a state of activity 25

2.5.1.5.Up means aiming at a goal 25

2.5.1.6.Up means More. 26

2.5.1.7.Up means completion 27

2.5.2 Phrasal Verbs with Out and Container Metaphor 27

2.5.2.1.Out means accessible 28

2.5.2.2.Out means inaccessible 29

2.5.2.3.Out means expansion 31

2.5.2.4.Out means abnormal 32

2.5.2.5.Out means activation 32

2.5.3 Meaning Transference in Phrasal Verbs with Up……… 33

2.5.4 Meaning Transference in Phrasal Verbs with Out……… 34

CONCLUSION 36

3.1 Major findings of the study 36

3.2 Pedagogical implications 37

3.3.Limitations of the study and suggestions for further research 38

REFERENCES 39

I. Rationale of the study

Phrasal verbs are widely acknowledged as being a notoriously difficult area oflanguage for both teachers and learners of English The tendency in the past, even untilpresent has been to regard phrasal verbs as items that could be learnt by heart only Thereason for this is that particles often change the meaning of verb in such a way that it is notpossible to connect it any more with the dictionary definition of the individual words.Moreover, the same combination of verb and particle seems to mean different things indifferent contexts, which supports the intuition that the final meaning is absolutelyarbitrary Besides, as long as the expressions refer to spatial locations and movements, themeanings are quite transparent, but when they refer to more abstract concepts such asfeelings or relations, the meanings are not so obvious (Rudzka-Ostyn, 2003)

In many cases, a teacher of English who attempts to explain the meaning of phrasal

verbs finds that s/he cannot give a reason why „turn up’ is translated to „happen‟ and the

same goes for thousands of other phrases Yet, it is undeniable that phrasal verbs are soexpressive that they are very widely used in native speech, especially in spoken English.What is more, new phrasal verbs are constantly being created in many fields such asEnglish for Computing, Medical English, etc Working as a lecturer of English at Faculty

of English for Finance and Accounting at Academy of Finance, I find that phrasal verbsmake up a huge amount of verbs in business texts and course books that I am using andwant to find out a reasonable explanation for the use of phrasal verbs which cause troubles

in comprehending for students and teachers as well Apparently, what makes phrasal verbs

so unpredictable is the meaning of the particles, since they seem to be quite arbitrarythemselves, whereas the meaning of the verbs is usually less controversial

Over the past few years, a cognitive approach to meaning of English particles hasproduced good results in explaining numerous possible uses of English particles and howthey are related to one another Also a lot of attempt has been made by many linguists tofind out whether phrasal verbs are purely idiomatic, less idiomatic or newly metaphorised

or whether they consist related and transparent meaning so that they can be used in alogical way From the above facts, I want to apply some recent findings about the meaning

of particles up and out in Cognitive semantics perspective to the meaning of phrasal verbs with up and out in Business context.

AI. Aims of the study

This study is aimed at

 classifying semantic description of the English phrasal verbs with up and out basing

on contribution of the particles‟ meaning in light of cognitive semantics,

 investigating meaning transference of phrasal verbs with up and out

 and drawing out pedagogical implications for teaching and learning English phrasalverbs

Hoping that this study may provide teachers and student of English for SpecialPurpose (ESP), namely English for Business with a better understanding of meaning ofphrasal verbs

BI. Scope of the study

The study is limited to investigating senses of the English phrasal verbs formed

with up and out found in business texts within semantic theoretical framework Up and out

are chosen as they are highly frequent and have a wide range of meanings This analysis is

based on a manual collection of 46 up-phrasal verbs and 42 out-phrasal verbs, taken from

course books that I am using for my current teaching at the AOF, namely, IntelligentBusiness (Intermediate, Upper Intermediate), Market Leader (Pre-intermediate),Management and Marketing, and from a website that provides online business lessons Ioften use for teaching and suggest as a source of reference for my students at the Academy,namely, http://www.business-english.com/phrasalverbs/ Basing on the orientational Path

and spatial Container metaphors, 46 up-phrasal verbs and 42 out-phrasal verbs are analysed

and grouped in terms of meaning to explore their major senses, respectively

IV Organization of the study

To achieve the aims mentioned, the study consists of 3 main parts includingintroduction, development and conclusion The introduction presents rationale to the study,aims, scope and organization of the study The conclusion briefly summarizes the mainfindings of the study, draws out some pedagogical implications and suggests further study

in the field The development of the study is divided into 2 chapters Chapter 1 gives a brieftheoretical background of the study with important concepts Chapter 2 first presents themethod of the study, data collection, analytical framework, data analysis and discussion.References and appendices of phrasal verbs taken for analysis are also included.

DEVELOPMENTCHAPTER I: THEORETICAL BACKGROUND

This chapter gives some brief background on cognitive linguistics, its relation toparticles‟ meaning, phrasal verbs‟ meaning and introduces important concepts for thestudy

1.1 Background on Cognitive Linguistics

Cognitive linguistics (CL) refers to the school of linguistics that is primarilyconcerned with investigating the relationship between human language, the mind andsocio-physical experience (Croft & Cruse, 2004; Evans & Green, 2006; Langacker, 1978)

It understands language creation, learning, and usage as best explained by reference tohuman cognition in general It is characterized by adherence to three central hypotheses

identified in Cognitive Linguistics (2004: 1-4) by Croft & Cruse First, it denies that there

is an autonomous linguistic faculty in the mind; second, it understands grammar in terms ofconceptualization; and third, it claims that knowledge of language arises out of languageuse This section will clarify the three mentioned hypotheses that guide the cognitiveapproach to language

The first hypothesis argues that language is not an autonomous cognitive faculty Itsuggests that knowledge of language is not different from other knowledge in general Toput it another way, process of language acquisition works in the same ways as other mentalprocess Although cognitive linguists do not necessarily deny that part of the humanlinguistic ability is innate, they deny that it is separate from the rest of cognition Thus,knowledge of linguistic phenomena i.e., phonemes, morphemes, and syntax is essentially

conceptual in nature Moreover, they argue that the storage and retrieval of linguistic datamay processes in the same way as the storage and retrieval of other knowledge and use oflanguage in understanding employs similar cognitive abilities as used in other non-linguistic tasks

The second hypothesis recognizes that it is not within the area of semantics that acognitive approach to language is relevant Its main content is embodied in Langacker‟sslogan „grammar is conceptualization‟ This slogan refers to a more specific hypothesis

about conceptual structure, namely, that conceptual structure cannot be reduced to a simpletruth-conditional correspondence with the world, all grammar is seen as symbolic.

The third hypothesis of the cognitive linguistics approach assumes that knowledge

of language is derived from our conception of specific utterances, actual use That is,categories and structure in semantics, syntax, morphology and phonology are built up fromour cognition of specific utterances on specific occasion of use Therefore, language is both

embodied and situated in a specific environment As Croft & Cruse (2004:4) note:

“cognitive linguists argue that the detailed analysis of subtle variations in syntacticbehaivor and semantic interpretation give rise to a different model of grammaticalrepresentation that accommodates idiosyncrasies as well as highly general patterns oflinguistics behavior.”

1.2 Background on Cognitive Semantics

As part of the field of cognitive linguistics, cognitive semantics represents anapproach to the study of mind and its relationship with embodied experience and culture Itproceeds by employing language as a key tool for uncovering conceptual organization andstructure As one of the original pioneers of cognitive linguistics, Leonard Talmy (2000: 4)describes cognitive semantics as “Research on cognitive semantics is research onconceptual content and its organization in language”

Cognitive semantics is not a single unified framework Different cognitivesemanticists have a diverse set of foci and interest However, there are a number ofprinciples that collectively characterizes a cognitive semantics approach According toTalmy (2000), Lakoff & Johnson (1980), and Geerearts (1999), cognitive semantics ischaracterized by four guiding principles These principles can be stated as follows: i)Conceptual structure is embodied; ii) Semantic structure is conceptual structure; iii)Meaning representation is encyclopedic; iv) Meaning construction is conceptualization.This part of the study is written to provide a preliminary overview of how these principlesare reflected in the concerns addressed by cognitive semantics

The first guiding principle represents a fundamental concern of cognitivesemantics It reveals the relationship between conceptual structure and the externalexperience of the world This idea holds that the nature of conceptual organization arises

from bodily experience Due to the nature of our bodies, we have a species-specific view ofthe world (Geerearts, 1993; Talmy, 1985, 2000; Taylor, 1989) That is to say, our construal

of reality is mediated by the nature of our embodiment Things that we can perceive andconceive derive from our embodied experience From this point of view, the human mindmust bear the imprint of embodied experience This position holds that conceptual is aconsequence of the nature of our embodiment and thus is embodied

The second principle that semantic structure is conceptual structure resides in thatlanguage refers to concepts in the mind of the speaker rather than directly, to objects in realexternal world Rosch (1973) asserts that semantic structure (the meanings conventionallyassociated with words and other linguistics units) can be equated with conceptual structure(concepts in the mind of the speaker) However, this claim does not mean that semanticstructure and conceptual structure are identical Cognitive semanticists hold that themeanings associated with linguistic units such as words, for example, form only a subset ofpossible concepts in the mind of the speakers and hearers One typical example illustratingthis principle is pointed out by Langacker (1987) He argues that we must have a conceptfor the place on our faces below our nose and above our mouth where moustaches go.However, there is no English word that conventionally encodes this concept at all.Therefore, we have more thoughts, ideas and feelings than we can conventionally encode

with a particular linguistic unit is simply a „prompt‟ for the process of meaning

construction: the „selection‟ of an appropriate interpretation against the context of the

utterance

The fourth guiding principle is that language itself does not encode meaning.Instead, as we have seen, words (and other linguistic units) are only „prompts‟ for theconstruction of meaning as argued by Geeraerts, D (1999) Accordingly, meaning is

constructed at the conceptual level Meaning construction is equated withconceptualization, a process whereby linguistic units serve as prompts for an array ofconceptual operations and the recruitment of background knowledge Meaning is a processrather than a discrete „thing‟ that can be „packaged‟ by language.

1.2.1 Embodiment and conceptual structure

The thesis of embodiment is addressed through image schemas developed by MarkJohnson (1987) Image schemas are relatively abstract conceptual representations that arisedirectly from our everyday interaction with and observation of the world around us That

is, they are concepts arising from embodied experience

The conceptual structuring system approach developed by Leonard Talmy (2000)illustrates the way in which language reflects conceptual structure which in turn reflectsembodied experience Talmy has argued that one of the ways that language encodes

conceptual representation is by providing structural meaning, also known as schematic

meaning This kind of meaning relates to structural properties of referents (the entities that

language describes such as objects, people and so on) and the scenes (the situation and

events that language describes) He also argues that schematic meaning is directly related

to fundamental aspects of embodied cognition, and can be divided into a number of distinctschematic systems, each of which provides a distinct type of meaning that is closelyassociated with a particular kind of embodied experience

1.2.2 Metaphors and metonymy

Two major types of figurative usage are metaphor and metonymy Metaphor and

metonymy both involve a vehicle and a target Metaphor involves an interaction between

two domains construed from two regions of purport, and the content of the vehicle domain

is an ingredient of the construed target through processes of correspondence and blending(Croft & Cruse, 2004: 193) Metonymy is a figure of speech in which one word or phrase

is substituted for another with which it is closely associated (such as "the White House" for

"US president and his administration") Metonymy is also the rhetorical strategy ofdescribing something indirectly by referring to things around it, such as describingsomeone's clothing to characterize the individual In metonymy, the vehicle‟s function ismerely to identify the target construal The meanings of phrasal verbs are often difficult to

remember, because they seem to have no connection with the words that they consist of(the verb and the particle) In fact many phrasal verbs are metaphorical, and if learnersunderstand the metaphors they use, it will be easier to understand and remember theirmeanings Therefore, in this study, metaphor will be used to explain the meaning of phrasalverbs.

1.2.2.1 Metaphors

Metaphors are seen in language in our everyday lives In human‟s cognition aboutthe world, metaphor is considered as one of the most important process In languagelearning and using, it is one of the most common device Actually, there have been manydefinitions for metaphor Aristotle – the first builder of metaphor theory defines it as

“transfer of a name belonging elsewhere” (cited in Leezenberger, 2001:33) In hisdefinition, metaphor is construed as a linguistic phenomenon that directly connectsseemingly unrelated subjects Traditional approach (Halliday, 1985) also considersmetaphor as a mere figure of speech, but not a concept of thought

More recent frameworks such as cognitive semantics (Lakoff and Johnson, 1980;Lakoff, 1990, 1993) view metaphor as a cognitive mechanism In the book “Metaphor WeLive By” (1980: 36), Lakoff and Johnson define metaphor as a conceptual process by

“which we conceive one thing in terms of another, and its primary function isunderstanding.” According to this perspective, metaphor is viewed as understanding oneconceptual domain in terms of another conceptual domain

Sharing the same view, a definition given by Cambridge Advanced Learner‟sDictionary considers metaphors as “an expression which describes a person or object in aliterary way by referring to something that is considered to possess similar characteristics

to the person or object you are trying to describe.” Oxford Advanced Learners‟ Dictionarywrites “metaphor is a word or phrase used in an imaginative way to describesomebody/something else, in order to show that the two things have the same qualities and

to make the description more powerful.”

Obviously in all definitions metaphor is viewed as the description or conception ofone object, one action, and one process in terms of the others due to some of their similarqualities, which can be illustrated in the following pairs of sentences

Pair 1:

- The dog dug up an old bone.

- We dug up some interesting facts.

- Burglars had broken into their house while they were away.

- She broke into his conversation.

In each pair, the first phrasal verb has a literal meaning and refers to a physicalaction, while the second is metaphorical and describes an action that is similar in some way

to the first For example, when someone digs up information, they discover it, and the

process seems similar to the way in which dogs find bones that have been buried in theground

In cognitive linguistics, conceptual metaphor, or cognitive metaphor, refers to theunderstanding of one idea, or conceptual domain, in terms of another, for example,understanding quantity in terms of directionality (e.g "prices are rising") The regularitywith which different languages employ the same metaphors, which often appear to be

perceptually based, has led to the hypothesis that the metaphorical relations or mappings between conceptual domains corresponds to neural mappings in the brain Conceptual

metaphors shape not just people‟s communication, but also shape the way they think andact

One of the most influential books to emerge from the cognitive linguistics is

Metaphors We Live By (Lakoff & Johnson, 1980) Lakoff and his colleagues use evidence

from everyday conventional linguistic expressions to infer the existence of mappingsbetween conceptual domains in the human mind His goal in developing the conceptualtheory of metaphor is to uncover these metaphorical mappings between domains and howthey have guided human reasoning and behavior In the book, the writers show thateveryday language is filled with metaphors people may not always notice

An example of the commonly used conceptual metaphors is argument as war that we can easily notice in a normal conversation is discussed in Metaphors We Live By (1980).

This metaphor shapes human‟s language in the way people view argument as war or as a

battle to be won It is not uncommon to hear someone say "He won that argument" or "I

attacked every weak point in his argument” Argument can be seen in many other ways

other than a battle, but we use this concept to shape the way we think of argument and the

way we go about arguing Conceptual metaphors typically employ a more abstract concept

as target and a more concrete or physical concept as their source

1.2.2.2 Mappings

According to Lakoff (1993) a metaphor involves the mapping of a source domain, orsome of its elements, to a target domain, which often follows the pattern TARGET-DOMAIN IS SOURCE-DOMAIN, or TARGET-DOMAIN AS SOURCE DOMAIN(1993:207) To make it clearer, an exemplary mapping of the metaphor „love is a journey‟

is provided, where the lovers represent passengers, their love is the means of transport, thewelfare of the relationship equals the destination of the journey What is more, Lakoffsuggests that “The metaphor is not just a matter of language, but of thought and reason”.Such metaphors and mappings of one domain onto another, as he goes on to say, areschematic and constitute a rigid component of our comprehension and perception of certainconcepts, which explains why language users are able to make sense of various linguisticrepresentations of one conceptual metaphor

A mapping (metaphorical relation) is the systematic set of correspondences that exist

between constituent elements of the source and the target domain Many elements of targetconcepts come from source domains and are not preexisting To know a conceptualmetaphor is to know the set of mappings that applies to a given source-target pairing

According to Taylor (2002:439) a domain is configuration of knowledge important to

the characterization of the meaning of a semantic unit Moreover, as he points out,depending on their complexity domains might be simple or basic which refer to conceptssuch as colors, space and time Those are called basic as they cannot be reduced to anyother simpler conceptions, while the complex domains include, for example, typical eventscenarios, social practices or rules of a game

Source domain: the conceptual domain from which we draw metaphorical

expressions (e.g., love is a journey) To put it another way, a source domain is a concept

that is metaphorically used to provide the means of understanding another concept

Target domain: the conceptual domain that we try to understand (e.g., love is a

journey)

The mappings of a conceptual metaphor are themselves motivated by image schemas

concerning space, time, moving, controlling, and other core elements of embodied humanexperience

1.2.3 Image schemas

Another key notion necessary for this study is image schema Image schemas are

relatively abstract conceptual representations that arise directly from our everydayinteraction with and observation of the world around us According to Lakoff (1987), animage schema is a recurring structure within human cognitive processes which establishespatterns of understanding and reasoning Johnson also defined an image schema as “amental pattern that recurrently provides structured understanding of various experiences,and is available for use in metaphor as a source domain to provide an understanding ofother experiences” (1987:29) Both scholars argue that meaningful structure from bodilyexperience gives rise to concrete concepts like the CONTAINER image schema, which inturn serves to structure more abstract conceptual domains like STATES Different scholarsprovides different list of image schemas In compliance with cognitive postulates, evidencehas been provided that the CONTAINER and PATH schemas are very productive in theconstruction of many metaphors in English That is why the container and the path schemasprovided by Johnson (1987) are chosen as tools for data analysis in this study

According to Johnson (1987:21-22), a container schema is an image schema that

involves a physical or metaphorical boundary, enclosed area or volume, or excluded area orvolume A containment schema can have additional optional properties, such as transitivity

of enclosure, objects inside or outside the boundary, protection of an enclosed object, therestriction of forces inside the enclosure, and the relatively fixed position of an enclosedobject

Johnson (1987:115) also described a path schema as an image schema that involves

physical or metaphorical movement from place to place, and consists of a starting point, agoal, and a series of intermediate points

1.2.4 Trajector and Landmark

Trajector and Landmark are two other cognitive notions that have been used in morerecent approaches of prepositions and particles (Lindstromberg, 1997; Peña, 1998; Rudzka-Ostyn, 2003) and they will be used in describing relational expression of the particle in thisstudy.

As described in Langacker (1987), Fillmore (1985), trajector (TR) is the element orentity that is located, evaluated or described with request to another element or entitycalled landmark and is the most prominent or the foregrounded element in a scene or

relational structure (conceptual domain) The trajector may be an object (The plane took off), a person (I’m going out tonight) but also a feeling or feelings (Your real feelings are

finally getting through me), in fact, it can be any entity on which our attention focuses It isgenerally smaller, flexible and moving

Landmark (LM) is the entity that acts or is construed as a reference point for the TR

It is the second prominent or foregrounded participant in a profiled relationship It usuallyhappens that the LM is bigger in size and it gets a relative fixity or location, as opposed to

the TR For example, in the language of emotions, a specific emotion such as mourning in

She is in mourning acts as the LM.

1.2.5 Perspective and Construal

An important factor in some of the extended meanings of particles has to do with thecognitive notions „perspective‟ and „construal‟ From this point of view, the most relevant

case is that of out Huddlestone and Pullum (2002: 651) discuss the contrast between The

sun is (came) out and The light is (went) out, showing that the former sentence means that

“the sun is visible” whereas the second sentence means that “the light is invisible” Theopposing meaning is attributable to different perspectives The notion of perspective, one

of the dimensions of construal (Langacker, 1991) refers to the viewpoint adopted by the

conceptualizer of a referent or situation In the two examples deictic verbs come and go do corroborate the notion of viewpoint Come specifies a path toward the viewer and go

specifies a path away Sometimes it is the verb rather than the particle which mainlycontributes to the meaning of the whole phrasal verbs

The only similarity with the two sentences above is that both imply an opposition

between an inner and an outer area The difference is that in the sun example the observer

(conceptualiser) is located in the outer area, so that any other entity in that area is withinthe observer‟s visual field By contrast, in the light example, conceptualiser is in the innerarea Therefore, the first kind of situation is conceived of and portrayed in terms of

movement towards the observer (The sun came out) whereas the second kind of situation is construed as movement away from the observer (The light went out).

Also according to Langacker (1987), the term construal refers to our ability ofconstruing or viewing the same conceptual content in alternate ways Linguistic meaningconsists of both conceptual content and the construal imposed on that content The classicalexample of construal is the half-filled glass described either as „half-full‟or „half-empty‟.Therefore the notion of construal points to different ways of thinking about the samesituation/activity reflected in a person‟s choice between various linguistic alternatives

1.3 An overview of English phrasal verbs and English particles

than their Latinate synonyms, e.g use up vs consume; gather together vs assemble; put

out vs extinguish Many phrasal verbs can be replaced, with little change of meaning, by

single word verbs, for example, give in by yield, look after by tend, carry on by continue,

put up with by tolerate In most cases the phrasal verb is less formal, more colloquial and

more image-and/or emotion-laden than the single word

1.3.1.1 Definitions of phrasal verbs

Tom McArthur in The Oxford Companion to the English Language (1992: 772)

notes that phrasal verbs are referred to by many other names such verb phrase,discontinuous verb, compound verb, verb-adverb combination, verb-particle construction

(VPC), AmE two-part verb and three-part verb David Crystal in The Cambridge

Encyclopedia of the English Language calls this linguistic phenomenon a "multi-word

verb" that is best described as a lexeme, a unit of meaning that may be greater than a single

word (1995:118) Cowie and Mackin (1993) also share a similar idea that a phrasal verb isessentially a verb and one or two additional particles As can be seen from the aboveexamples, the phrasal verb consists of a verb, usually a monosyllabic verb of action or

movement such as go, put, take, and one or more particles The particle may be an adverb,

a preposition, or a word that can act as either adverb or preposition

In English, verbs are often put together with adverbs as in put the book down, run

back, warm the coffee up Verbs are often combined with prepositions, too, as come into the hall, drop the glass on the floor All these combinations are easy to understand because

we can work out the meaning from those of the individual verbs and adverbs or

prepositions However, some combinations are much more difficult to understand as break

out used in the following sentence:

The crisis broke out in some European countries.

In this example, the verb „break‟ does not have the meaning it has in phrase like

break the ruler and out does not mean „outside in the open‟ The combination has to be

understood as one unit, meaning „start suddenly or violently‟ When a verb + particles(adverb/preposition) is a unit of meaning like this, it is a phrasal verb Sometimes, a verb,

an adverb and a preposition are combined to form one unit of meaning such as put up with,

face up with They are also phrasal verbs.

1.3.1.2 Some main types of phrasal verbs

According to Acklam (1992), there are four basic types of phrasal verbs These typesappear very often in reading texts on Banking – Finance and Accounting These are asfollows:

Type 1: verb (v) + adverb (adv) with no object (obj).

The verb and adverb cannot be separated in phrasal verbs of this category For example,

Our business is going well We are thinking of branching out into fashion for children Branch out means expand/do something new There is no passive form with type 1 phrasal

verbs

Type 2: v + adv + obj/ v + obj + adv

The verb and adverb of this type can be separated If the object is a noun, the adverb

can come before or after the noun For instance, the phrasal verb bring down means

„reduce‟ in the sentence We must bring down the price of the concert tickets if we are

going to be competitive.

If the object is a pronoun, the object is always between the verb and adverb: We must

bring it down if we are going to be competitive.

Type 3: v + preposition (prep) + obj

The preposition cannot be separated from the verb, for example, come into a fortune

(inherit).

Type 4: v + adv + prep + obj

Phrasal verbs in this type have two particles They cannot be separated from the verb

Face up to something means „confront/accept and deal with something unpleasant‟.

Eg: You must face up to the fact that you are probably going to lose your job.

1.3.2 Particles

Prepositions are highly polysemous words The traditional view considered that allthe senses of a preposition were highly arbitrary and were not related to one another.Consequently, both dictionaries and grammars used to provide long lists of unrelatedsenses for each preposition and its possible uses in different contexts The problem greweven worse when it came to the study of verb-particle constructions, where the contribution

of the particle to the meaning of the whole is crucial

The term „particle‟ (Latin particulla „small part‟) discussed by Hartmann (1999:271) denotes elements of uninflected word classes frequently found in languages such asClassical Greek, German, Dutch, Norwegian, English In late twentieth century particleresearch, the term has been used with at least three meanings; first, in a very general sense,referring to all uninflected elements as particles, second, in a narrow sense, designatingonly modal and focus particles and third, considering particles as subsets of invariablessuch as adverbs, conjunctions and prepositions

It is in this third sense that the term is used in this paper More specifically, theresearcher attaches the sense provided by Collins Cobuild English Usage (1992: XV),

namely “a particle is an adverb or preposition such as out or up which combines with verbs

to form phrasal verbs”

1.4 Phrasal Verbs in terms of Cognitive Semantics

A phrasal verb consists of a verb (dig, shoot, or break) and a particle (an adverb like down or up, or a preposition like into) When the verb part of a phrasal verb is used in

a metaphorical way, this is usually quite obvious But the particles may be usedmetaphorically, too According to the definition of phrasal verbs and the fact they aredifficult to learn, it is necessary to show that phrasal verbs are difficult to understand onlybecause of the meaning of the particles and foreign learners of English do not usuallynotice that their meanings clearly go from the concrete to the abstract from cognitiveperspective

The cognitive approach considers that all the senses in a polysemous word arerelated and the meaning of a word can be seen as a big semantic network of related senses.Therefore, all the possible senses of a particle would make up a large network of relatedsenses, some of them more central, some of other being less significant The core meaning

of a preposition is the one that refers to the cognitive domain of physical space, whereasother abstract senses “tend to be derived from concrete, spatial senses by means ofgeneralization or specialization of meaning or by metonymic or metaphoric transfer”(Cuyckens & Radden, 2002: xiii) According to Tyler and Evans (2003 & 2004), Englishprepositions encode an abstract mental idealization of a spatial relation, derived from morespecific spatial scenes This can be seen clearly in the following example

(1) Some teenagers like to be in their own room.

(2) Teenagers are more likely to fall in love.

The spatial sense of the preposition “in” is quite obvious in sentences (1) Far moreabstract is the meanings of sentences (2) in which more abstract concept LOVE, is alsoperceived as physical entities, as containers that people can get “into” or “out of” Therelation between “teenagers” and “love” is considered a metaphorically spatial one and this

is the reason why the preposition “in” is used In this network of senses that constitute themeaning of a preposition, conceptual metaphors play a leading role

In the following examples, those particles that refer to physical motion are often used to designate abstract, invisible changes.

(3) He ran up the hill.

(4) Heavy buying ran the price of stocks up higher than expected.

(5) To throw a person out of a club

(6) To throw out old clothes

This is less easy to recognize, but in fact there is often a clear connection between theliteral meanings of the particle and its metaphorical uses In English, like many otherlanguages, the basic, literal meanings of adverbs and prepositions refer to direction,

position in space, distance, or extent Up literally describes movement towards a higher position; down literally describes movement towards a lower position The metaphorical uses of these particles develop from these literal ones Up has metaphorical meanings to do with increases in size, number, or strength (prices went up); down has metaphorical

meanings to do with decreases in size, number, or strength

CHAPTER II: THE STUDY

In this chapter, the hypotheses will be restated in 2.1, methods of the study will behighlighted in 2.2, the data will be described in 2.3, the framework for data analysis will beintroduced in 2.4, data analysis and discussion will be presented in 2.5

2.1 Research Questions

Adopting a cognitive linguistic perspective, I assumes that particles out and up are

networks of related senses derived from a spatial meaning and they make somecontribution to meaning of phrasal verbs A logical explanation for meanings of phrasalverbs is very important in teaching and learning English phrasal verbs Therefore, tworesearch questions are raised:

- Are meanings of phrasal verbs with up and out motivated by the meaning of the

Then data were collected and carefully analyzed They are phrasal verbs in businesscontexts taken from course books for business students and business online lessons

Sentences containing phrasal verbs up and out are extracted manually and classified

according to groups of senses of phrasal verbs Then they are analyzed in the light ofcognitive linguistic perspective with the use of image schemas and metaphoricalextensions The aim of examination was to prove that there is a logical understanding of

senses conveyed by phrasal verbs with up and out.

The analysis is conducted both deductively and inductively with assumption that

meanings of the English phrasal verbs are metaphorical extensions in which particle out

presupposes the prior existence of a container either metaphorically or literally and particle

up denotes the movement along a path in the same way Through the analysis of data, the

paper has tried to find out main senses of phrasal verbs constituted from particle out and