Learning/Acquiring English Phrasal Verbs

Introduction
The dichotomy learning/acquisition has raised debates and controversies as to the nature and the development of the processes which contribute to their realisation. For a long time, it has been established that we acquire one’s first language and we learn any other language which is not our first language. Nowadays, this distinction no longer satisfies our understanding derived both from day to day observation and more organised research.
In this paper, we will refer to the foundations of Second Language Acquisition and will analyse the case of phrasal verbs, an area of grammar not always focused on and not always understood because of its complexity. We will report on the results of an investigation of the degree of acquisition of phrasal verbs by advanced learners of English as a foreign language at University level.
1. Foundations of Second Language Acquisition
Foreign language acquisition research took place around the 1960s where empirical research was directed at describing the characteristics of the learner’s language and how these change as acquisition takes place.
The starting point of foreign language acquisition investigation is the identification of the universal characteristics of foreign language acquisition. The description of the language learner provides an account of the learner’s competence in terms of grammatical competence, discourse competence (the ability to use grammatical competence to make cohesive and coherent texts), sociolinguistic competence (the ability to use language appropriately in different contexts) and strategic competence (the ability to compensate for difficulties and make the use of language effective)(Canale and Swain, 1980,cited in Ellis and Roberts, 1987:19).
The next step is an explanation of how learners develop knowledge of the foreign language and how they use this knowledge in communication. Both external and internal factors play a role in foreign language acquisition. External factors relate to the role played by the social situation in which learning takes place and how the input accounts for acquisition through observation of the output. The choice of the language used is seen to be affected by whom the learner is speaking to (the interlocutor), where, when, why (the purpose of communication) and what is to be communicated. Internal factors relate to the mental processes that the learners use to convert input into knowledge, to internalise knowledge of the foreign language.
Krashen (1981, 1982, 1985) puts forward a theory of second language acquisition that consists of five hypotheses. First, the Acquisition / Learning Hypothsis states that there are two ways of developing ability in the foreign language: acquisition – an unconscious process that involves the natural development of language proficiency through understanding language and using language for meaningful communication that results in “knowing how” the language functions – and learning – a conscious process that results in “knowing about” the language, learning the rules that make up the language. The acquisition process results in an implicit store of knowledge and the learning process in an explicit store of knowledge viewed as a facilitator of implicit knowledge, as it enables learners to notice features in the input and compare them with their interlanguage – the internal system that a learner has constructed over time, the mental grammar that a learner has constructed in the process of acquiring a foreign language. Second, according to the Natural Order Hypothesis, we acquire the rules of a language in a predictable order, some rules tending to come early and others late. Third, the Monitor Hypothesis considers that our ability to produce language comes from our acquired comprehension; learning serves only as a monitor. We resort to learning – our conscious knowledge of the language – to make corrections in the output of the acquired system. Fourth, according to the Input Hypothesis, acquisition takes place through receiving and understanding “Comprehensible Input”. If there is enough comprehensible input, the necessary grammar is automatically provided. Fifth, the Affective Filter Hypothesis is based on the idea that when the affective filter – this mental block preventing learners from fully assimilating the comprehensible input they receive – is up as when they are unmotivated, lacking in self-confidence or anxious, the input may be understood, but it will not reach the acquisition process.
Empirical evidence has shown that certain language items are learnt, others acquired. In some cases, acquisition has taken place, but the rules are not used. This corresponds to the process of “fossilisation”, the process by which non-target forms become fixed in the interlanguage. This takes place when there is insufficiant quantity of input, inappropriate quality of input, acquisition of deviant forms and when the affective filter and the output filter which prevent acquired rules from being used are up.
2. Place of Phrasal Verbs in Grammar Books
We will now look at one case of learning / acquiring a foreign language – phrasal verbs. We believe that in order to develop a rapid acquisition, the teaching methodology has to be appropriate to the type of element to be acquired. We do not teach all the elements of the language the same way, with the same amount of time. Besides, teaching overtly certain language elements does not always produce a rapid acquisition of these elements; they have to go through their natural route of development. For example, the “s” third person singular rule is a very easy rule to teach, to apply in exercises, but it takes years for the Algerian learners to acquire it. Why is such a simple rule to learn difficult to acquire? The likely reasons are lack of reciprocity in the first language and incoherence of the rule – “s” is a mark for plural nouns and a mark of singular for verbs. Lack of systematicity of the rule makes it a very late acquired rule.
What is the case of phrasal verbs? Before we investigated the degree of acquisition of phrasal verbs of advanced learners of English as a foreign language at university level, we looked at the place and methodology of teaching phrasal verbs in a certain number of Grammar books (See References for 2. : The Place of Phrasal Verbs in Grammar Books).
Allsop (1983) uses the expression “phrasal verbs” to refer to three patterns:
• V + Adv. : Give up.
• V + Prep. : Look after.
• V + Adv. + Prep. : Get down to.
and the term “particle” to refer to the adverb or preposition which follow the verb. He gives a list of particles which function :
• only as prepositions :
- after : Look after your sister.
- against : Don’t go against the rules.
- at : Get at the meaning.
- For : Stand for what you believe in.
- from : She comes from the South.
- into : Go into the question.
- like : It looks like it.
- to : Get down to work.
- With : Put up with your sister.
- Without : Go without food.
• only as adverbs :
- away : Don’t run away.
- Back : Take it back.
- Forward : Bring the date forward.
- Out : Put the lights out.
• as prepositions or adverbs : most particles may function as a preposition or an adverb. The most common ones are about, across, along, around, before, up, under, through, round, behind, by, down, in, off, on, over.
What distinguishes the prepositional verb (V+Prep.) and the phrasal verb (V+ Adv.) is :
1. the place of the object : when the object can be inserted between the verb and the particle, the latter is an adverb ; when it cannot, it is a preposition.
Eg : Look it up .
Adv.
Eg : Look up the street .
Prep.
In the first case, “up” is part of the meaning of the verb (what must I look?) .
In the second one, it relates to the object (Where must I look?).
2. The stress pattern: in a V + Prep., stress is on the verb ;
in a V + Adverb.,stress is on the particle or equally on the verb and the
particle.
In relation to the word order in phrasal verbs, in other words, should the object be between the verb and the particle or at the end, the choice may depend on a slight change of meaning, on the rythm of the sentence or on personal preference of the speaker.
Eg : - Put away your toys.
- Put your toys away.
- Put them away.
(a personal pronoun object is always between the verb and particle).
- Put away all what you have bought today.
(a long object is always at the end).
Phrasal verbs are very common and widely used by native speakers of English, both in everyday speech and in writing. They form a great part of the language and are constantly being created or other meanings of the already existing ones are added.
A certain number of phrasal verbs have a corresponding one word verb, usually of classical (Latin or Greek) origin (to give up: to abondon), but the single word can often sound odd or too formal in everyday speech where the phrasal verb is expected.
On the whole, the meaning of phrasal verbs can be derived from the verb, from the particle or from the two if the parts of the phrasal verb have their literal meaning or only a slightly transferred meaning (not literal, metaphorical).
Eg : He sat down. (Literal meaning).
Eg : He tore the notice do. (Slightly transferred meaning).
We can guess the meaning of many phrasal verbs like to get up, to go up / down, to send away, to take away, to bring back. However, many phrasal verbs have a meaning which cannot easily be deduced from the meaning of the parts of the verb, a transferred or metaphorical meaning.
Eg : He gave up smoking. (stopped).
These kind of phrasal verbs can only be learned by experience and with the help of a dictionary. What also creates difficulty in understanding phrasal verbs is that sometimes a phrasal verb has several meanings.
Eg : Take your glasses off. (remove).
Eg : The plane took off. (left the ground).
Eg : He is a wonderful mimic, he can take off most people. (impersonate).
Eg : Do you think this book will take off? (be a success): this is a metaphorical use
of “take off” associated to the planes and is typical of the way in which the
meaning and use of phrasal verbs grows.
Chalker (1984) draws the attention to the fact that what distinguishes the prepositional and the phrasal verb is the place of an adverb: in a prepositional verb, it can be between the stem and the preposition, not in the case of a phrasal verb.
Eg : He looked (briefly) at the timetable.
Adv.
Eg : He (eagerly) looked up the word in the dictionary.
Adv.
Eastwood (2006) gives a list of the phrasal verbs which have as equivalent a one word verb usually from Latin origin and considered formal.
- to find out : to discover.
- to go back : to return.
- to go on : to continue.
- to leave out : to omit.
- to make up (a story) : to invent.
- to put off : to postpone.
- to hand (send) out : to distribute.
- to throw away : to discard.
- to turn up : to arrive.
We note that these one-word verbs are easier for us to remember .
Fucks & al (2003) and Maurer (2004) explain the difference between phrasal verbs in terms of separable phrasal verbs where the object can be inserted between the stem and the particle, and inseparable phrasal verbs where the stem and the particle cannot be separated by the object.
Inseparable :Eg : She ran into the man in front of her .
Eg: She ran into her friend in the market .
Separable : Eg: She looked up the information in the dictionary.
She looked the information up. She looked it up.
Leech and Svartvick (1975) clearly distinguish between prepositional verbs and phrasal verbs. They mention the three reasons we have already mentioned :
1. the difference of stress,
2. the difference in the place of the object,
3. the difference in the place of the adverb,
and add a fourth reason:
4. the difference in the use of a relative pronoun: prepositional verbs accept a relative pronoun after the preposition, not phrasal verbs.
Eg: The men (whom) they called up.
but not The men (whom) they called on.
In Lekeu (1997), each unit has a section about phrasal verbs. The directions are “add an ‘adverbial particle’ to the verbs”. For example, “Our summer dresses were cheap and sold ........ fast (were all quickly sold)”. The expected ‘adverbial particle’ is “out”.
Lott (2005) has an extensive list of phrasal verbs per category with examples (V+Adv. (Transi.), V+Adv.+ing. Form, V+O+Adv. and V+Adv.+Prep.+O) followed by exercises including these phrasal verbs.
In Loughed (2006), the mystery of prepositions (as the title of the book says) is tackled throughout the book in chapters labelled in types of prepositions: time, place, cause ... . The methodology used is to:
1.choose the appropriate preposition in context : a guided activity,
2.select an appropriate preposition in a narrowly defined situation:a guided activity,
3.use prepositions in sentences, which is a free production.
Murphy (2004) deals with phrasal verbs through a series of exercises and some reference to general rules about the place of the preposition. The units about phrasal verbs are divided in terms of the nature of the preposition: in, out, ... .
Shrampfer Azar (2002) devotes eight appendixes to phrasal verbs with the directions: “Supply appropriate prepositions for these two and three-word verbs”.
The following table sums up the major terms used in relation to phrasal verbs.
Term Definition and / or Example
1. One word verb Eg: to look. He looks ill.
2. A two-word verb Eg: to look up. Look up the street
3. A three-word verb Eg: to look up to. He looks up to his father.
4. Prepositional verb V+Prep. Eg: He looks at her.
5. Phrasal verb V+Adv. + Prep. Eg: He looks forward to meeting.
6.Particle/Adverbial An adverb or preposition used in a multi-word verb.
7. Preposition A word that precedes a word which it governs, usually a Nor a N phrase.
8. Adverb A word that modifies or qualifies a verb, an adjective or another adverb.
9. Adverbial Any word, phrase or clause used like an Adverb.
10.Separable Phrasal Verb A multi-word V which can be separated by an O. Eg: Look it up.
11.Inseparable Phrasal Verb Amulti-word Vwhich cannot be separated by an O.Eg:Look up the street.

3.Acquisition of Phrasal Verbs by Advanced Learners of English as a Foreign Language at University Level
As further back as my early years of learning my first and second language (French and Strandard Arabic), I have always expressed the need to understand why such a language element is formed and functions in such a way . When I studied English, my urge to understand why has not stopped. I remember asking my English teacher “Why can’t we say I can to work”? and I distinctly remember her shocked face and her “arrogant” answer: “you ask too many questions, it’s just like that.” I knew “it was like that”, but I wanted to understand WHY it was like that. Can grammar tell us why it is like that?!It tells us how it is more than why. It is clearly the case of phrasal verbs.
Teaching phrasal verbs is one of the most difficult area in grammar because of the lack of systematicity of the rule – if there is one , and as we have just said , not all grammar books deal with this aspect, and when they do, they do it in a variety of ways. We undertook to find out how much of this teaching background has produced acquisition in advanced learners of English as a foreign language at university level, how much knowledge of this thorny area learners who have gone through four years of English at university level, who are presently teaching at the university has been acquired. We invited all the teachers in our Department, holding a B.A or a Master and having graduated in the last ten years to take part in the study (75) and 57 came to take part in this investigation. The informants were formally invited to take part in this study but were not told the object of the investigation so that they would answer the test spontaneously – without any special preparation. The informants are classified into three categories: holders of a B.A; not registered in a Master (20), holders of a B.A, registered in a Master (26: this year : 15, in the past three years : 11) and holders of a Master (11: registered in a Ph.D :05, not registered in a Ph.D : 06).
Before the test the informants answered, we wanted to find out whether they knew the expression “Phrasal Verbs” , and if “yes”, what they thought it meant. Only four informants from Category I said that they did not know the expression; the others gave a satisfactory definition.
The test is made up of four parts – Definitions, Matching, Multiple-Choice and Cloze Procedure – each part involving ten phrasal verbs. The choice of these activities is related to the nature of the task required to be performed. As to Definitions, if an informant can define a word, an expression, it shows understanding. Matching offers the possibility to identify the phrasal verbs, think about their meaning, definition, use before inserting them in the blanks. Multiple Choice offers the same type of activity as Matching, except that for each blank, three possibilities are provided – one distractor is made up of the right base verb plus another particle, and the other distractor is made up of another verb plus the right particle. The Cloze Procedure is made up of a text with blanks to be freely filled in. This activity is the one which tells us most about whether the informants know a phrasal verb – whether the one we have omitted or another one which fits the context. These four activities, requiring different performances, different strategies will enable us to see to what extent they can put words on a phrasal verb (Definition), identify the right phrasal verb (Matching), choose (and use) the right phrasal verb (Multiple Choice) ,and use phrasal verbs (Cloze Procedure).We had thought about the highest level – free production, but we decided against it because it requires a large scale operation, and there is no guarantee that the informants would use phrasal verbs (avoidance phenomenon).
The fourty phrasal verbs included in the four activities (ten per activity) have been selected according to three criteria.
• I know the phrasal verb .
• The likelihood that the majority of the informants can at least understand the phrasal verbs .
• An advanced learner of Category III of the informants knows the majority of the phrasal verbs.
The phrasal verbs combine a variety of particles and relate more to a formal use (academic use).
The texts used for Matching, Multiple Choice and Cloze Procedure were selected according to the nature of:
• the topic: topics specific to women or men or requiring a specific knowledge were discarded,
• the discourse, style, vocabulary, structure: the combination of these elements had to be at the informants’ level.

Table 1: List of Phrasal Verbs per Activity
Definition Matching Multiple Choice Cloze Procedure
1. to call in to go through to go through to open up
2. to catch up to mark down to put away to break into
3. to hand over to check against to look for to switch off
4. to identify with to lie down to ask for to cut off
5. to knock out to drift off to hand in to send for
6. to keep at to give out to put off to arrive at
7. to narrow down to come up with to call off to write down
8. to pass out to tear up to talk over with to sweep up
9. to sleep on to believe in to come across to carry out
10. to show off to say about to leave behind to beat up

Looking at the phrasal verbs which had the highest scores in Category I, we see that these phrasal verbs had higher scores in Category II and Category III, except for “to knock out” which had slightly lower scores in Category II and for “to identify with” which had lower scores in Category III; 45.46% of Category III of the informants, the most advanced learners , said they were not sure about “to identify with”. This seems strange, but in fact it shows that when they were sure, they gave the right definitions. “To show off” is less known by Category I, but on the whole, it is an acquired phrasal verb which must have been come across in different texts and focused on in teaching.
The phrasal verbs known by the majority of Category II and Category III are the same, except for “to pass out” (to become unconscious or to give something to somebody), which is not known by the majority of Category II. As we will see later, this phrasal verb is easily confused with “to pass away” (to die).
Our next analysis focuses on the definitions provided by the informants when they said they knew the phrasal verb and gave the right or wrong definition, and when they said they were not sure and gave the right or wrong definition.


If it is rather expected to give a wrong definition when we are not sure about a definition, it is less expected to get a wrong definition when we say we know the definition.