Adverbs and Prepositions and Conjunctions, Oh My!

(Mr. K's Grammar World :: Ask Questions :: Practice Exercises)

If you are going to understand how the human body works, you have to start with basic anatomy and kinesiology (the study of muscles and human movement). Would you go to a doctor who doesn't know what the kidneys do? Similarly, you can't learn a language (including your first language) without an understanding of grammar and how language works.

Of course everyone learns their first language and every high school student in the history of high school students (including me, I'm ashamed to say) has said the same thing. "Why do I need to learn grammar? I already know how to speak (insert your first language here)." While it is true that everyone can speak a first language and most people can read and write in that first language, not everyone can do it WELL. (Ang Kok Weng recently came up with a very good example posted on a radio station's website. See if you can find the adverb error that inspired this entry.)

When I began teaching ESL a thousand years ago, in the late-80s, I used to tell my students "Your goal should be to speak as well as native-speakers." Now, sadly I have to tell them "Your goal should be to speak better than native-speakers." I am constantly amazed and saddened by how badly native speakers abuse English, especially my fellow Americans. I won't go into detail about why I think this happened, but basically it started because of one decision. Somewhere not long after I graduated from high school in 19**, grammar stopped being taught in most Language Arts classes and when it is taught, it's taught poorly and the materials are incredibly boring and confusing.

Well, I think it is time to bring grammar back. In order to understand language, you have to understand grammar. In order to understand grammar, you have to start at the beginning: Parts of Speech. The big four (nouns, verbs, adjectives and adverbs) are the same in every language around the world. We all have them and they all work in basically the same way. Of course there are relatively small differences, like English and Spanish have singular and plural noun forms while most Asian languages do not. The big stuff, however, is the same. I'll write about nouns, verbs and adjectives later. Let's begin with adverbs, prepositions and conjunctions*.

Basically, all three do the same thing. They answer the questions when, where, why and how (which also includes how long, how often, etc.). For example:The children are playing outside. (where)

• The children are playing in the backyard. (where)
• Tommy is doing his homework now. (when)
• Tommy is writing his essay on his computer. (how)
• Tommy is using his sister's computer because his has a virus. (why)

The difference between adverbs, prepositions and conjunctions has NOTHING TO DO WITH MEANING. The difference is what comes AFTER the adverb, preposition or conjunction.

An adverb is a single word (and occasionally a pair of words like at last) that is not connected to anything. In the above examples, outside and now are adverbs because they are alone. (But don't worry. They aren't lonely. It's like being single in your mid-20s. You are free to go anywhere and do anything you want.)

A preposition, however, is ALWAYS connected to a noun phrase and only a noun phrase**. One way to tell the difference between an adverb and a preposition is to take the word out of the sentence and see what happens. For example:

• Suddenly, all the children jumped in.
• Suddenly, all the children jumped in the pool.

In the first example, even without in, the sentence is understandable. I would like more information, but grammatically it's ok. In the second example, though, it doesn't work. How do you jump a pool? Therefore, in the first example, in is an adverb because it's not connected to anything, but in the second example, in is a preposition because it is connected to the pool.

Finally, conjunctions are followed by entire clauses***. There must be a subject AND a verb. Look at the following examples.

• The game was cancelled because of the bad weather.
• The game was cancelled because the weather was so bad.

In the first example, because of is connect a simple noun phrase to the main clause. In the second example, because is connecting a clause (subject = weather; verb = was). Therefore, because of is a preposition and because is a conjunction.

Another, even better way to decide if a word is a preposition or a conjunction is to change the noun directly after the word to a pronoun.

• I took a shower after my brother.
• I took a shower after him.

• I took a shower after my brother finished his.
• I took a shower after he finished his.

In the first pair, my brother changes to him, which is an object pronoun. (me, you, him, her, it, us, them). My brother is the object of the preposition. Prepositions are followed by object pronouns. In the second pair, my brother changes to he, which is a subject pronoun (I, you, he, she, it, we, they) Conjunctions are followed by clauses. Clauses must have subjects. Conjunctions are followed by subject pronouns.

To summarize: If you remember the following, you will almost never mis-identify adverbs, prepositions and conjunctions again.

• adverb + Ø
• preposition + noun phrase (or an object pronoun)
• conjunction + clause (w/ a subject AND a verb)

• I have never eaten this before.
• I had never eaten that before my trip to Japan.
• I had never eaten that before I went to Japan.

In all three of these examples, before has the same meaning. However, in the first, it's an adverb because it is alone. In the second, it is a preposition because it is followed by a noun phrase and in the third, it is a conjunction because it is followed by the subject pronoun I and the verb went.

I hope this helps. Please ask any and all questions you might have if I haven't explained this well enough. (And I hope this isn't too colorful. I try to use color to highlight important points, and in this case to highlight differences, but if it's too much, let me 
know.)

(Mr. K's Grammar World :: Ask Questions :: Practice Exercises)

______________________________________________

*In this case, conjunctions will be limited to subordinating conjunctions like because and will not include coordinating conjunctions like and. I'll write about the differences between these two types of conjunctions later.

**Prepositions can also be followed by pronouns, which are substitutes for nouns, and some can be followed by a gerund, which is the noun form of a verb.

***Clauses that begin with subordinating conjunctions are called adverb clauses.

The Eternal Question: Which or That?

Students are constantly asking me this question, which refers to adjective clauses*. My dirty little secret is that I didn't know the difference or which to use until I was in my late 20s and in graduate school. Finally, in grammar class one day, my professor made it crystal clear with a very simple explanation. Hopefully I can explain it as well as he did. In order to understand the main question, we need to go back to some basic questions.

1. What is an adjective clause?

Adjectives are words that describe nouns. Most commonly, you put them in front of the noun that is being described, like:

• the noisy baby
• the fluffy dog
• a gorgeous wife

(And I am proud to say I have all three of these in my family.)

A clause is a group of words that has a subject and a verb and can stand alone as a sentence. For example:

• The baby loves to destroy the living room.
• The dog drives me crazy sometimes.
• My wife is a wonderful mother.

If I want to use these clauses to describe the nouns from above, I would connect them as adjective clauses, which come after the noun. If I were to describe my family, this is how I would do it with adjective clauses.

• I have a noisy baby who loves to destroy the living room.
• I also have a fluffy dog that drives me crazy sometimes.
• I am married to a gorgeous woman who is also a wonderful mother.

(I consider myself the luckiest man on the planet. Who could ask for anything more?)

2. How do you connect adjective clauses to nouns?

This is done with a small group of words called relative pronouns, which are:

• who / which / that
• where / when / why

For this entry, we will focus only on which and that. I will write about where and when at a later time. Relative pronouns, and the rest of the adjective clause, must come directly after the nouns that they modify**.

Adjective clauses can be divided into two types: defining and non-defining clauses. This is the key to understanding which and that and whether you need commas or not.

3. What are defining and non-defining clauses?

A defining clause is a clause that gives necessary information. Without the information in the clause, the reader cannot understand the sentence. Important information is missing.

• The book is very interesting. (What book?)
• The puppy is really cute. (Which puppy?)
• Kai paid for his insurance with the money. (What money?)

The information that you need to answer the questions is in the adjective clause. (Notice that the noun usually has the. It can also be preceded by a or be a plural noun with neither a nor the.)

• The book that I am reading right now is very interesting.
• The puppy that my friends just adopted is really cute.
• Kai paid for his car insurance with the money that he earned from his summer job.

In all of these cases, I used the relative pronoun that and there are no commas.

A non-defining clause is unnecessary. You still have a complete, understandable main clause without the adjective clause.

• Call of the Wild is one of my all-time favorite books.
• My friend's new puppy is really cute.
• Kai paid for his car insurance with his own money.

However, if you want to add some extra information that may or may not be interesting to the reader, you can add it with a non-defining clause.

• Call of the Wild, which I just reread recently, is one of my all-time favorite books.
• My friend's new puppy, which they rescued from the Humane Society, is really cute.
• Kai paid for his car insurance with his own money, which he earned by working at McDonald's.

Each of these non-defining clauses uses the relative pronoun which and has a comma both at the beginning of the clause and at the end of the clause. If you have one comma, you need the second (unless it's the end of the sentence, in which case, just use a period.)

To summarize:

When do you use that? Does that need commas?

• That is used with defining clauses.
• That is used to connect necessary information that the reader MUST have.
• You NEVER use commas with that.
• Nouns that are followed by that usually have the or a in front.

When do you use which? Does which need commas?

• Which is used with non-defining clauses.
• Which is used to connect extra, bonus information that may or may not be interesting to the reader.
• You ALWAYS use commas with which at the BEGINNING and END of the clause.
• Capitalized nouns are almost always followed by which.
• Nouns that are followed by which usually have my or this or a possessive noun in front.

I hope this explanation helps. If anything is unclear or you need more explanation, please ask. Nothing is ever perfect the first time no matter how many times you proofread.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

*Some people refer to them as relative clauses. Both names are correct and they mean the same thing.

**A common error that students make is putting the clause at the end of the sentence, like:

• Barack Obama is the 45th President of the United States, who grew up in Hawaii.

The adjective clause is describing Barack Obama, not the President, so it must move to the front of the sentence, as in:

• Barack Obama, who was born in Hawaii, is the 45th President of the United States.

Thanks for the Questions (Vol. 1)

A couple of really good questions were asked on Mr. K's Grammar World page on Facebook, and the explanations could get lengthy, so today I will begin a new series to answer specific grammatical questions. I will put two or three explanations on each page, depending on how lengthy they get. Here goes.

From Grammar Pupil: "Is it okay to say 'they got panicked' instead of 'they panicked.' If so, what's the difference between them?"

To understand this, you need to back up a few steps. I will give a short explanation of ~ed/~ing adjectives here, but if you would like more, let me know and I will post a separate entry later.

There is a group of adjectives that I call ~ed/~ing adjectives. Usually these are emotions that come from verbs, like:

• excited/exciting (excite)
• confused/confusing (confuse)
• bored/boring (bore)

The original verb is a non-action verb and can be used in several patterns.

• The directions are confusing. (~ing adjective)
• I am really confused by the directions. (~ed adjective)
• The directions confuse me. (verb)

When you are talking about a change in your mental state, or a change in feeling, you can change the "be" verb to get or become, so it is correct to say "I am getting confused." If you want to include both the thing that is causing the confusion (the directions) and the person who is feeling confused (me), then using the verb form in an SVO clause is probably the best choice. "The directions confused me."

However, does panic fit in with this group? To me, the answer is "No. Not really." While the verbs mentioned above are non-action verbs, panic is more of an action verb. To panic means not only to feel fear, but also to react to that fear by running away or behaving in an irrational way. Also, when I double-checked this in a dictionary, there was no mention of panicked or panicking as adjectives. (Confused, however, was listed as an adjective.)

Therefore, I would say the statement "They got panicked" is not standard for formal English. However, in informal English, it makes sense to me, it fits logically with other emotions and I would say it's ok in limited, conversational situations. For formal, academic situations, though, I would definitely go with "They panicked," using panic as a verb.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From Ang Kok Weng: "Which of these sentences is* correct?

1. I have never taken care of my mother since 2009.
2. I never took care of my mother since 2009.
3. I have never been taking care of my mother since 2009."

In this sentence, there are two things that determine how to make this statement grammatically correct. The first one is the tense marker** since. Whenever you use the word since, which is both a preposition and a conjunction, to mean how long, you MUST use the present perfect tense (have done). There is no other alternative in English.

Second, the use of never is not appropriate because it implies that the writer has not taken care of his mother even once in his entire life. That just makes him a bad son, which I assume is not true. (Also, you wouldn't include the length of time, since never means in your entire life.) The correct choice of negative word in this case is not. Put these two together and the best way to explain this situation is:

• I haven't been taking care of my mother since 2009.

There are a couple of other things that I would suggest as an editor. Whether the writer decides to make the changes is purely optional depending on the situation and what he is trying to communicate.

1. I'm assuming that this is referring to the care of an elderly parent. If so, it might be appropriate to add the helping verb have to. This might sound a little harsh, as if the writer resents this duty. He may not want to be this strong. If so, then the original is best.

2. In the negative form, it is also correct to use the present perfect "I haven't taken care of..." This is simpler than the continuous form, which the writer used, and because the action is finished, it is no longer continuing. (If this were an affirmative statement, as in "I have been taking care of my mother...", then the continuous form is the best choice because the action is still continuing.)

3. Finally, from this information, I assume that the writer had been taking care of his mother before 2009 and for some reason, the situation changed. Therefore, I would like to know why. Is your mother now healthy enough to take care of herself again? Is your mother now living with one of your brothers or sisters? If the former is correct, then haven't had to is definitely the best choice. If the latter is true, then change the subject and make it an affirmative sentence. Here are my suggestions.

• I haven't had to take care of my mother since 2009 (because she is feeling much better.)
• My sister has been taking care of my mother since 2009 (because her youngest child is now in school and she has more free time).

Ultimately, the writer must decide which of these suggestions is best for what he is trying to express.

-----------------------------------------------------

*A tense marker is what I call the word (usually an adverb) in the sentence that determines what verb tense to use. Usually means you must use the simple present, right now indicates the present continuous and since requires the present perfect.

Fabulously Frustrating Phrasal Verbs (Part II)

Part I of Fabulously Frustrating Phrasal Verbs described what phrasal verbs were and gave two tests for deciding whether a verb was a phrasal verb or a regular one-word verb followed by an adverb or a prepositional phrase. They are:

1. When you add the second word, does the meaning of the word change?
2. Can you change the order of the "preposition" and object?

If the answer to either question is yes, then it is definitely a phrasal verb. However, a no answer does not necessarily mean the verb is not a phrasal verb, especially rule 2. If a phrasal verb is separable, then you can change the order, but if a phrasal verb is inseparable, the object cannot be put in the middle, like run out of milk. In addition to these two questions, there are three other good ones to help you decide "Is it a phrasal verb or not?"

3. What happens when you change the object to a pronoun?

This question is similar to question 2 because it only works with separable phrasal verbs. Consider the following sentences.

1. I looked up the word in the dictionary.
2. I turned off the television.
3. I threw out the empty cans.

In the first two sentences, you can change both word and television to it. In the third example, cans becomes them. In all three sentences, you must move the pronoun BEFORE the "preposition". Therefore, these are all phrasal verbs.

1. I looked it up...
2. I turned it off.
3. I threw them out.

Remember that this rule does not work with inseparable phrasal verbs. If you change the object of We ran out of milk and eggs to them, the sentence would still be We ran out of them even though run out of is a phrasal verb.

4. Is there a one-word verb that has the same meaning?

This is another very helpful question for me. Try replacing the phrasal verb with a one-word verb. If you can, then it is definitely a phrasal verb. For example:

1. come back / return
2. look up to / admire
3. stand up / rise
4. throw away / discard
5. blow out / extinguish
6. blow up / explode
7. hand out / distribute
8. talk about / discuss*
9. put off / postpone
10. make fun of / tease

Once again, even if you can't think of a one-word verb with the same meaning, the verb still could be a phrasal verb. This rule works best for native-speakers, but as your English improves, your ability to do this will increase. Also, sometimes there isn't a good one-word verb, like turn off the TV. I can't think of a good one. Can you?

5 . Where would you put a natural pause?

This might be the most accurate and useful of the five questions. I use it all the time. However, it does require some level of native-speaker intuition, which I believe that even intermediate students of English can develop to a certain level. Obviously this is much easier for me, but trust your instincts. You probably know a lot more than you think.

To do this, you say ALOUD the phrase you are not sure of two different ways. First you put an extended pause between the main verb and the "preposition". Then you put an extended pause between the "preposition" and the object. Which one sounds more natural? For example:

• We ran ....... out of milk and eggs.
• We ran out of ....... milk and eggs.

As a native speaker, it seems much more natural to say this phrase the second way. Therefore, ran out of is a phrasal verb and milk and eggs is the object. On the other hand:

• The people ran ....... out of the burning building.
• The people ran out of ....... the burning building.

Again, as a native speaker, the first phrase seems much more natural. Consequently, run is a simple verb meaning to move quickly and out of the burning building answers the question "Where did they run?"

Even as a native-speaker, I don't know every phrasal verb in English and I use these five questions to decide whether a verb is a phrasal verb or not. Unfortunately, just knowing a verb is a phrasal verb is not enough. However, it is much easier to guess the meaning if you know you are reading a phrasal verb and much easier to look one up as well.

In the end, though, you will still have to spend time memorizing individual phrasal verbs like regular vocabulary. Such is the nature of language. But recognizing is a first, very important step and to do that, remember these questions.

1. When you add the second word, does the meaning of the verb change?
2. Can you change the order of the "preposition" and the object?
3. What happens when you change the object to a pronoun?
4. Can you think of a one-word verb that has the same meaning?
5. Where would you put a natural pause?

And if you have any questions, just ask.

Aloha.

____________________________________________________________________

*One very common ESL error is for students to say discuss about. This problem comes from phrasal verbs. The mistake is that talk about (two-word phrasal verb) has the same meaning as discuss (one word). However, students don't recognize that talk about is a phrasal verb. Instead, they think talk and discuss are synonyms and that they both need about, which is incorrect. Don't use about with discuss.