Syntactic and semantic features of SET phrasal verbs with reference to vietnamese translation equivalents

MINISTRY OF EDUCATION AND TRAINING
HANOI OPEN UNIVERSITY

NGUYỄN THỊ MI
SYNTACTIC AND SEMANTIC FEATURES OF SET
PHRASAL VERBS WITH REFERENCE TO VIETNAMESE
TRANSLATION EQUIVALENTS
(Đặc điểm cấu trúc và ngữ nghĩa của cụm động từ đa thành tố với
SET và các hình thức diễn đạt tương đương trong Tiếng Việt )
M.A. THESIS

Field: English Language
Code: 8220201

Hanoi, 2018


MINISTRY OF EDUCATION AND TRAINING
HANOI OPEN UNIVERSITY

NGUYỄN THỊ MI
SYNTACTIC AND SEMANTIC FEATURES OF SET
PHRASAL VERBS WITH REFERENCE TO VIETNAMESE
TRANSLATION EQUIVALENTS
(Đặc điểm cấu trúc và ngữ nghĩa của cụm động từ đa thành tố với
set và các hình thức diễn đạt tương đương trong Tiếng Việt )
M.A. THESIS

Field: English Language
Code: 8220201
Supervisor: Assoc. Prof. Dr. Hồ Ngọc Trung

Hanoi, 2018


STATEMENT OF AUTHORSHIP
I, the undersigned, hereby certify my authority of the study project report entitled
“Syntactic and semantic features of SET phrasal verbs with reference to
Vietnamese translation equivalents” submitted in partial fulfillment of the
requirements for the degree of Master in English Language. Except where the
reference is indicated, no other person‟s work has been used without due
acknowledgement in the text of the thesis.
Hanoi, 2018

Nguyen Thi Mi

Approved by

Assoc. Prof. Dr. Ho Ngoc Trung
Date:……………………

i


ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
I would like to express my deepest appreciation to all those who provided me
with the possibility to complete the current paper.
First and foremost, I would like to say a big thank you to my supervisor,
Assoc. Prof. Dr. Ho Ngoc Trung, whose step- by- step instructions, insightful
comments, enormous and continuous encouragement helped me a lot throughout the
whole process of carrying out this investigation. I am really more thankful than I

can express.
Furthermore, I am also greatly indebted to all the lecturers in Faculty of Post
Graduate, Hanoi Open University for their enthusiasm, expertise and support. I
would like to say a special word of thanks to Assoc. Prof. Dr. Hoang Tuyet Minh,
who inspired me and helped me narrow down the topic.
I am also very grateful to my beloved students in Phuong Dong university,
who were willing to take part in the written test, which offered me a relevant and
reliable source of data for this study to be conducted. A final word of gratitude is to
my family, without whose support and encouragement, this paper would not have
been completed.

ii


ABSTRACT

The purpose of this study is to examine the syntactic and semantic features of
English SET phrasal verbs and the way how they are translated into Vietnamese.
This study used both quantitative and qualitative methods as the main ones. In
addition, a descriptive method was also used to shed light into the features of these
English structures in terms of syntax and semantics. Finally, some other methods
and techniques such as statistical technique and survey sampling method were also
used by the writer of this paper to measure the chosen participants‟ ability to
respond to a translation written test. The findings showed that English SET phrasal
verbs have only two uses in terms of syntax including intransitive and transitive
while no copular phrasal verbs were found. What‟s more, SET phrasal verbs have
three levels of idiomaticity semantically including non- idiomatic, semi- idiomatic
and highly- idiomatic. The way they were conveyed into Vietnamese varies among
Vietnamese translators. There can exist various equivalents for a certain SET
phrasal verb due to the discrepancies of the two languages belonging to two

different language families. Furthermore, the variety of the Vietnamese translation
equivalents stem from the differences in formality or contextual factors. These
findings will be useful to all those who do translation from English into Vietnamese
and vice versa.

iii


LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS AND SYMBOLS
A

Adverbial

C

Complement

Co

Object complement

Cs

Subject complement

-ed

-ed participle form

-ing

-ing participle form

NP

Noun phrase

O

Object

Od

Direct object

Oi

Indirect object

PV

Phrasal verb

PVs

Phrasal verbs

Ph- PrV

Phrasal - Prepositional verb

Pron.

Pronoun

PrV

Prepositional verb

S

Subject

Sb

Somebody

St

Something

V

Verb

VP

Verb phrase

√

Acceptable / grammatically correct

*

Unacceptable / grammatically incorrect

{}

Free alternatives

/

Alternatives

=

Semantic equivalence

iv


LIST OF DIAGRAMS
Diagram 2.1
Diagram 2.2

Auxiliaries
Lexical verbs

13

13

LIST OF TABLES
Table 2.1

15

Table 2.2

The categorization of particles
Basic particle meanings in Oxford Phrasal Verb Dictionary

Table 2.3
Table 3.1

PV classification based on compositionality
Subjects of the research

28
30

Table 4.1

Complex transitive SET PV in the model SVOC

41

Table 4.2
Table 4.3

Ditransitive SET PVs
Monotransitive SET PVs and their meanings

43
44

Table 4.4
Table 4.5
Table 4.6
Table 4.7

Non-idiomatic SET PVs and their meanings
Semi-idiomatic SET PVs with their family group
Highly-idiomatic SET PVs and their meanings
SET PVs and their Vietnamese translation equivalents

48
49
50
52

27

LIST OF CHARTS
Chart 3.1
Chart 3.2

Students' ability to translate SET PVs into Vietnamese
35
The frequency of using SET PVs by students in their 36

translated outputs

v


TABLE OF CONTENTS
Certificate of originality
Acknowledgements

i
ii

Abstract

iii

List of abbreviations

iv

List of tables and figures

Chapter 1: INTRODUCTION

v
1

1.1
1.2

Rationale for the study
Aims and objectives of the study

1
2

1.3.
1.4

Research questions
Methods of the stud

3
3

1.5
1.6
1.7

Scope of the study
Significance of the study
Design of the study

4
4
5

Chapter 2: LITERATURE REVIEW
2.1
2.2

2.2.1

Previous studies
An overview of syntax, semantic and translation theories
Syntax theories

6
7
7

2.2.2 Semantic theories
2.2.2.1 Interpretative semantics

8
9

2.2.2.2
2.2.3
2.3
2.3.1
2.3.1.1
2.3.1.
2.3.2
2.3.2. 1

Generative semantics
Translation theories
An overview of English verbs and phrasal verbs
English verbs
Definitions of English verbs

Ways of classification of verbs
English phrasal verbs
Definitions of phrasal verbs

9
10
11
11
12
12
14
14

2.3.2.2
2.3.2.3
2.3.2.4
2.3.2.5
2.3.2.6

Particles
Phrasal verbs and prepositional verbs
Phrasal verbs and phrasal- prepositional verbs
Syntactic criteria of phrasal verbs
Semantic criteria of phrasal verbs

15
15
17
18
25

vi


2.4

Summary

29

Chapter 3: METHODOLOGY

30

3.1

Subjects

30

3.2

Instruments

31

3.3
3.4
3.5

Procedures
Statistical Analysis
Summary

31
33
36

Chapter 4: SYNTACTIC AND SEMANTIC FEATURES OF “SET”
PHRASAL VERBS AND THEIR VIETNAMESE TRANSLATION
EQUIVALENTS
4.1

Syntactic and semantic features of SET phrasal verbs

37

4.1.1 Syntactic features of SET phrasal verbs
4.1.1.1 Copular SET phrasal verbs

37
37

4.1.1.2
4.1.1.3
4.1.2
4.1.2.1
4.1.2.2

37

40
47
47
48

Intransitive SET phrasal verbs
Transitive SET phrasal verbs
Semantic features of SET phrasal verbs
Non-idiomatic SET phrasal verbs
Semi-idiomatic SET phrasal verbs

4.1.2.3 Highly-idiomatic SET phrasal verbs

50

4.2
4.3

51
58

4.3.1
4.3.2
4. 4

SET phrasal verbs and their Vietnamese translation equivalents
Some implications for Vietnamese translators to translate SET
phrasal verbs
Some implications in translating SET phrasal verbs into Vietnamese
Some implications in translation from Vietnamese texts into English

using SET phrasal verbs
Summary

58
61
62

Chapter 5: CONCLUSION

63

5.1
5.2

Summary of Findings
Concluding remarks

64
64

5.3

Recommendations for Further Study

65

REFERENCES
APPENDICES

vi

ix

vii


CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION
This chapter gives some overall information about the topic which has been
chosen to investigate by the writer. First, it describes a general background of the
topic, the reason as well as the necessity of the study. Then, aims and objectives of
the research are also clearly presented and they are followed by three research
questions, which will be answered in Chapter 4. After that, this chapter provides a
brief explanation about the methods utilized during the research process, the scope
and the significance of the investigation of the topic. Finally, it indicates the overall
plan of the thesis and the way how this paper is structured.

1.1. Rationale for the study
It is obviously undeniable that English, which is becoming an increasingly
common international language, plays an extremely important part in our everyday
life. It is being taught in many countries worldwide as either a foreign or a second
language. As a matter of fact, in order to improve students‟ success in mastering
this fundamental language, a stronger emphasis should be placed on teaching
vocabulary, which is of paramount importance to language learning. However, one
of the most challenging areas in English vocabulary acquisition is phrasal verbs
(hereafter abbreviated as PVs). It is these PVs which tend to cause foreign learners
of English numerous difficulties with PVs usage in general and highly accurate
translation into their target language in particular. One main reason for the
troublesomeness of PVs is that the meaning of PVs is usually idiomatic and cannot
be determined by knowing the meaning of their individual parts. Furthermore, PVs
are polysemous, which means one PV may consist of many different meanings. It
seems to multiply difficulties for foreign language learners. Hence, there is a vital

need to make a thorough investigation into PVs in the hope to raise students‟
awareness of the syntactic and semantic features of these structures, which might
help them master this troublesome field of English language as well as translate PVs
effectively into Vietnamese or vice versa.
PVs are extremely common in our modern life. It is the common knowledge
that they are used a lot in everyday conversations and in many types of written

1


texts, such as reports, fiction, newspapers and magazines, and even academic
essays. It has drawn more and more attention from linguists and researchers
recently. For the past few decades, growing numbers of studies have been carried
out to devote to different types of PVs. PVs are also of great interest to a large
number of researchers both in other foreign countries and in Vietnam. Some
researchers dealt with a corpus-based study or a synchronic study on the use of PVs.
Others studied such individual phrasal verbs as go, run, take, look…However, SET
PVs, which are among commonly used ones in daily conversation or in newspaper,
have never been studied before. Thus, this current study is carried out to fill the
existing gap left in this interesting field of the English language.
In addition, PVs with SET, together with their multiple meanings, are
definitely one of the main difficulties that Vietnamese translators encounter. One
PV with SET, set up for one, has more than ten meanings. This leads to the fact that
Vietnamese translators cannot pinpoint which meaning is adopted in the context to
translate it accurately into Vietnamese. Also, an adequate translation requires
translators‟ good sense of nuances in the semantics of both the source language and
target language texts. This thesis, which studies the syntactic and semantic features
of PVs with SET, and based on English – Vietnamese bilingual database including
books, novels, newspapers and magazines… hopes to contribute to the avoidance,
or at least reduction of translating failure of Vietnamese translation leaners.

1.2. Aims and objectives of the study
This current paper is aimed at helping Vietnamese translation learners
master the PVs with SET in terms of syntactic and semantic features. Basing
themselves on the findings of the study, they will be able to be more successful in
translating English discourses into Vietnamese and vice versa.
The objectives of the study are:
- To identify the syntactic and semantic features of SET PVs;
- To investigate the ways SET PVs are translated into Vietnamese;
- To point out some applications to help Vietnamese translators quickly and
efficiently translate English texts with SET PVs into Vietnamese ones and vice
versa.

2


1.3. Research questions
The paper will attempt to answer three following questions:
1. What are the syntactic and semantic features of English PVs with “SET”?
2. How are SET PVs translated into Vietnamese?
3. What should be done to help Vietnamese translation students master translating
English “SET” PVs into Vietnamese and vice versa?

1.4. Methods of the study
This paper uses a number of methods and techniques so as to offer a
profound investigation of SET PVs with respective to their Vietnamese translation
equivalents.
First of all, the descriptive method is used by the writer in this study. This
method is aimed at casting light on the syntactic and semantic features of “SET”
PVs through a process of data collection. With the use of this method, each category

and subcategory of syntactic and semantic features of these PVs will be described in
a clear and detailed manner.
Second, the statistical technique is also utilized. This technique helps collect,
summarize, analyze and interpret the variable numerical data from the survey. The
usage of this technique results in correct evaluation of students‟ ability to respond to
the given test, which is clearly expressed in the percentage.
Finally, a written translation test is used as one of the main tools of collecting
data. It is used in combination with purposive sampling method in order to give a
valid and reliable reflection of students‟ ability to translate SET PVs from English
target texts into Vietnamese or use SET PVs in their translation outputs from
English source texts.

1.5. Scope of the study
English PVs and their noun derivatives account for a significant number of
new words which are now being coined in the English language. It is these PVs
which constitute one of the most distinctive and creative features of the English

3


language. A PV can be defined as an English verb followed by one or more
particles where the combination behaves as a syntactic and semantic unit. These
verbs are usually a monosyllabic verb of action or movement such as go, put,
take… There is a long list of these verbs listed down in PV dictionaries. Within the
framework of a thesis, the current study only treats PVs with SET only, and the
syntactic and semantic features are of our main concern.
PVs in general and phrasal verbs with SET in particular undoubtedly make it
really problematic for Vietnamese learners to master and Vietnamese translators to
tackle. A thoroughly conducted investigation of SET PVs will be of great help to
teaching / learning English as a foreign language or in the field of translation.

However, this study only pays attention to Vietnamese translation leaners, who are
expected to be able to benefit a lot from the findings of the study. The findings and
conclusion drawn are aimed at helping them with appropriate and sufficient
translation, in which bilingualism is much needed.
Among various methods which can be used to collect the database for
investigation, survey method will be utilized by the writer. A written translation test
was designed for third-year and fourth-year students majoring in English in Phuong
Dong University to collect the database for analysis. Also, the translation
equivalents of SET PVs have been collected from 23 English novels and their
translated versions, 2 English movies with subtitles, and finally some bilingual
website in Vietnam.

1.6. Significance of the study
It is generally agreed that idiomatic expressions, including PVs, present great
difficulties for foreign language learners. Various reasons have been highlighted,
which include the nature of PVs themselves. “SET” PVs are among these
troublesome ones. Theoretically, the current paper can provide a systematic insight
into the syntactic and semantic features of SET phrasal verbs. Practically, it is
hoped that the findings of the present study will be useful to everyone involved in
doing translation of the English and Vietnamese language. The overall aim of the
study is to help Vietnamese translators have a profound insight into “SET” PVs.
Accordingly, they will be made more aware of the syntactic and semantic features
of these PVs, which are prominent and important in the English lexicon, and yet

4


remain very challenging for language learners and translators. With the findings and
discussions drawn, Vietnamese translation leaners will definitely find their possible
solutions to the problems faced concerning translating “SET” PVs in English

contexts into their mother tongue or vice versa, using PVs with “SET” instead of
their single synonyms to make their translation sound more natural and much
image-laden.

1.7. Design of the study
The study is organized into five chapters.
Chapter 1, Introduction covers the problem statement and justification to
the research topic, the aims and objectives, the scope and the significance of the
study.
Chapter 2, Literature Review provides the synopsis of previous studies on
the similar topics, as well as presents a review of theoretical background and
theoretical framework for the case study.
Chapter 3, Methodology focuses on the research methods that were
followed in the study. It provides information on the subjects, instrumentation,
procedures and statistical analysis
Chapter 4, The syntactic and semantic features of SET phrasal verbs and
their Vietnamese translation equivalents synthesizes the key findings of the
research and prioritizes key recommendations to help Vietnamese translators
correctly translate English SET PVs into Vietnamese and vice versa.
Chapter 5, Conclusion gives the summary of the study and some
suggestions for further research.
References and appendices come at the end of the paper.

5


CHAPTER 2: LITERATURE REVIEW
This chapter is devoted to the presentation of the literature which has already
been done up to now. First, it provides a brief review of previous studies, which
were similar to the study on the topic under discussion. The purpose of doing so is

to see how PVs have been investigated so far, which aspects of PVs or SET PVs
have been studied and whether there is any gap for further research or not. After
that, the outline of theoretical background and framework which the writer drew
herself to in this study will be described.

2.1. Previous studies
There is little doubt that PVs always remain an extremely challenging aspect
of the English language to foreign learners regardless of the fact that they are of
great importance in mastering this language. Thoroughly understanding, correctly
utilizing and effectively translating them into another language is certainly one of
the top priorities in the process of conquering them. On account of that fact, a broad
range of researches have been done, devoting to different aspects of this tough part
of the English language.
There is a wide-ranging literature on PVs with different areas of focus. Some
studies deal with the semantic features of these combinations (McIntyre, 2002; and
Gorlach, 2004); some focus on their syntax (Sroka, 1972); a few others particularly
address the aspects associated with the particle elements of these structures (Gries
and Stefanowitsch, 2004; and Cappelle, 2005); there are still a number of corpusbased studies which discuss the frequency aspects of these units and their semantic
associations in various general and specialized corpora (Gardner and Davies, 2007;
Von, 2007; and Trebits, 2008). In a similar way, a large number of studies have
aimed at the avoidance of these combinations by non-native speakers with the
phenomenon being affected by a number of such factors as nativeness (Siyanova
and Schmitt, 2007), language distance (Hulstijn and Marchena, 1989), context
(Siyanova and Schmitt, 2007), degree of compositionality (Ishii and Sohmiya,
2006), developmental stage and task type and difficulty (Liao and Fukuya, 2004).
Given that the English PV combinations are regarded a nettle that has to be
grasped if students are to achieve native-like proficiency in speech and writing and

6

a grasp of them "can be a great asset to learners in acquiring a new language"
(Celce-Murcia and Larsen-Freeman, 1999), more emphasis has been placed on
investigating different aspects of PVs as well as different phrasal verbs among
Vietnamese researchers. One of them is “Phrasal verbs in English and Vietnamese
studies” by Hoang Thi Minh Phuc (2008). In her study, she gave a detailed review
of the way how PVs have been investigated throughout the history, both in English
and in Vietnamese. Another study named: “An investigation into the common errors
in the use of English phrasal verbs by English majored students at Ho Chi Minh
City Open University” was conducted by Ma Thi Minh Hieu. She examined the
common errors, the reasons for those errors commitment and presented some
implications for errors avoidance. In Hanoi Open University, several studies have
been done by learners such as “GET phrasal verbs in terms of syntactic and
semantic features with reference to Vietnamese equivalents”.
In conclusion, PVs have been quite a lot investigated by both foreign and
Vietnamese researchers so far. However, one of the common PVs, PVs with SET
are not much studied. That is the reason for this study to be conducted with a
broader range of database and a different application approach.

2.2. An overview of syntax, semantic and translation theories
2.2.1. Syntax theories
As a matter of fact, there are some of the devices users of human languages
employ to put meaningful elements together to form words, words together to form
phrases, phrases together to form clauses, clauses together to form sentences, and
sentences together to form texts. The emphasis here will be on the construction of
units larger than words, in particular clauses and sentences. This has often been
viewed primarily as the domain of syntax. 'The term "syntax" is from the Ancient
Greek syntaxis, a verbal noun which literally means "arrangement" or "setting out
together". Traditionally, it refers to the branch of grammar dealing with the ways in
which words, with or without appropriate inflections, are arranged to show

connections of meaning within the sentence.' (Matthews 1982:1). The expressions
of a language involve a relationship between a sequence of sounds and a meaning,
and this relationship is mediated by grammar, a core component of which is syntax.

7


In English and many other languages, the arrangement of words is a vital factor in
determining the meaning of an utterance.
According to Noam Chomsky (2002), syntax is the study of principles and
processes by which sentences are constructed in particular languages. Syntactic
investigation of a given language has as is goal the construction of a grammar that
can be viewed as a device of some sort for producing the sentences of the language
under analysis. It is actually a theory of linguistic structure in which the descriptive
devices utilized in particular grammars are presented and studied abstractly, with no
specific reference to particular languages. The central notion of this linguistic
theory is that of “linguistic level”. A linguistic level, such as phonemics,
morphology, phrase structure, is essentially a set of descriptive devices that are
made available for the constructions of grammar.
There are three main approaches to syntax: traditional syntax, functional
syntax and cognitive syntax. The traditional approach to grammar and syntax,
which was developed by Noam Chomsky focuses on forms, structures and rules
while cognitive approach, which was presented by Günter Radden and René Dirwen
gives insight into the nature of grammar as a human achievement and into the
cognitive principles that motivate its structure. Systematic functional grammar
originated by M.A.K Halliday assumes that the most useful and accurate way of
picturing language is a system of choices. Each choice contributes something to the
meaning of what is said; and by unpacking the choices we can explore in detail how
the resources of the language have been used to construct the meaning
Among three approaches to grammar and syntax above, this current paper

will choose to adopt the traditional syntax theory, which has been developed
through various works by Chomsky in order to investigate the syntax patterns of
SET PVS with the use of phrase structure grammar.

2.2.2. Semantic theories
There are two competing models of semantic theory which are currently
prominent. They are interpretative semantics and generative semantics, which was
initiated by the work of various early students of Noam Chomsky such as John R.
Ross, Paul Postal, and later James Mc Cawley, George Lakoff and Pieter Seuren
were also instrumental in developing and advocating the theory.

8


2.2.2.1. Interpretative semantics
The name “interpretive semantics” has come to be associated nowadays with
the so-called Extended Standard Theory, a model of grammar, developed by Noam
Chomsky in 1971. EST evolved out of the so-called Standard Theory , proposed by
Chomsky in his 1965 book “Aspects of the Theory of Syntax”. ST was the first
complete model of grammar which consisted of the syntactic, semantic and
phonological components. The main representatives of Extended Standard Theory
are N. Chomsky, A. Akmajian, R. Jackendoff and others.
In the model of interpretive semantics, the syntactic component consists of a
categorial subcomponent, the lexicon, a level of deep structure, a transformational
subcomponent and a level of surface structure. The phrase structure rules of the
categorial subcomponent generate the so-called trees or „phrase markers‟, which
capture the relations between particular elements of a sentence. The branches of the
trees, ending in nodes, are labelled by grammatical category symbols. The
categorial subcomponent together with the lexicon form the so-called base of the
syntactic component.

In short, this first semantic theory was designed to be compatible with
transformational syntax. Syntactic rules enumerated a set of well-formed sentences
paired with syntactic structures, each of which was assigned an interpretation by the
rules of a separate semantic theory. This left syntax relatively (though by no means
entirely) "autonomous" with respect to semantics, and was the approach preferred
by Chomsky.

2.2.2. 2. Generative semantics
Generative semantics accounts for meaning directly, not through syntactic
structure. In generative semantics, a descriptive grammar begins with a deep
structure that is semantic and, to some extent, pragmatic. This deep structure
consists of combinations of semantic features, semantic relations, performatives,
and presuppositions. Deep structures are then subject to lexical insertions and
transformations to ultimately yield surface structures, which then serve as the
structures to which the rules of the phonological component apply. In a generative
semantic account of a language, all meaning is present in this deep structure
(sometimes called logical structure in order to distinguish it from the syntactic deep

9


structures of interpretive semantics). Syntactic constituent structure rules do not
produce the deep logical structures and transformations never result in changes of
the meaning of a sentence. Furthermore, since this deep structure is purely semantic,
generative semantics appears to be a clever means for describing paraphrase and
ambiguity: both for syntax and for lexical items. This is particularly clear when we
consider that some paraphrase relations hold between a single lexical item and a
phrase with syntactic structure.
To conclude, each model of semantics has its own advantages. However, the
present study will be developed by following the interpretative semantics.

2.2.3. Translation theories
There have been numerous definitions of translation introduced by different
linguists so far. Some definitions stress the significance of „equivalence‟; for
example “Translation is the replacement of a text in one language by a replacement
of an equivalent text in a second language. (Meetham and Hudson, 1972).
Translation is the replacement of textual material in one language by equivalent
textual material in another language (Catford, 1965). On
the
other hand,
functionalists view translation differently: “Translation is the production of a
functional target text maintaining a relationship with a given source text that is
specified according to the intended or demanded function of the target text.” (Nord,
in shutttleworth and Cowie, 2007). Nord distinguishes between two senses of
translation: wide and narrow. Translation is, in a narrow sense, any translational
action where the source text is transferred into the target culture and language.
According to the form and the presentation of the source text and to the
correctibility of the target text, we distinguish between oral translation (=
“interpreting”) and written translation (= “translation” in the narrow sense)
In short, translation should be conceptualized as a target language product
which is as semantically accurate, grammatically correct, stylistically effective and
textually coherent as the source language text. In other words, the translator's main
attention should not be focused only on the accurate semantic transference of source
language message into the target language, but also on the appropriate syntax and
diction in the target language, which are explicitly the translator‟s (not the source
author‟s) domain of activity which displays his true competence.

10

The history of translation has undergone many remarkable periods of time,
each period has witnessed the emergence of many new theories. For example,
“polysystem theory” (Baker, 2005) offers a general model for understanding,
analyzing and describing the functions and evolution of literary systems, its specific
application to the study of translated literature. These systems, whether in the
original or translated texts subsume several levels: linguistic, cultural, and social, all
of which overlap and interact with each other. Another theory, “skopos theory”
(Vermeer, 1989) reflects a shift from predominantly linguistic and rather formal
theories to a more functionally and social- culturally - oriented concept of
translation. According to this theory, the contextual factors surrounding the
translation shouldn‟t be ignored. These factors include the culture of the intended
readers of the target texts and the client who commissioned it, and more
significantly the function which the text aspires to perform in that culture for those
readers. “Theory of sense” recommends that the focus should be on the intended
meaning or the sense rather than the words of the source texts. Another important
theory is called “manipulation theory” (Hermans, 1995). According to this theory,
translation process is deemed a rewriting process and the translator is a re-writer
who can alter or manipulate the ST in such a way as to be accepted in the target
language and culture. “Aesthetic communication theory” (As Safi, 2006) is
creativity-oriented specifically for literary translation. It is perhaps indisputable that
literary translation is not only informative, but also expressive or emotive.
In conclusion, many different theories have been proposed by different
linguists. Several of them, as presented above will be used by the writer of this
paper in a hope that some implications given, which are based on the translation
theories above might help Vietnamese translators with efficiently translating SET
PVs in English source texts into Vietnamese or vice versa, using SET PVs
appropriately and correctly in their translation outputs from Vietnamese into
English to make them sound natural to English readers.

2.3. An overview of English verbs and phrasal verbs

2.3.1. English verbs
PVs, in this paper, are regarded as verb-particle combinations, which act as a
single word lexically or syntactically. It is this extended sense of “verb” as a “unit

11


which behaves to some extent either lexically or syntactically as a single verb.
(Quirk R. Greenbaum S. & Leech G. & Svartvik J. [21,p1150] ). It is therefore
important to review some conceptual framework concerning the verb and its
classification.

2.3.1.1. Definitions of the verb
Levitchi believes that the verb is considered to be the heart of a sentence. It
is “a part of speech denoting actions: to work, to go , to sing; process in the form of
actions : to stand, to lie ; the appearance of a characteristic : to bud ; the
modification of a characteristic : to harden; an attitude : to be glad [16, p83]
Tran Huu Manh [25, p35] posits that a verb is a word (or a part of speech)
used to denote action or state, or, otherwise help to complete the meaning of the
verb phrase.
She goes there twice a week. (action)
She‟ll become a doctor. (state)
They‟re trying to finish the work. („re(are- auxiliary verb)

2.3.1.2. Ways of classification of the verb
There are many ways of classification of the verb. For example, Tran Huu
Manh divides the verb into two primary groups: lexical verbs and auxiliary verbs.
Lexical verbs (or main verbs) are those verbs that denote action or state while
auxiliary verbs are those that help complete the meaning of the verb phrases.[25,
p35]

We speak Vietnamese.
→ lexical verb .
You can go there now.
→ auxiliary verb.
Auxiliary verbs are then subdivided into secondary groups as shown in the
diagrams below:

12


Diagram 1: auxiliaries
Primary
Periphrastic

Perfect

Do

have

Modal

Progressive
be 1

Passive
be 2

can, may, must, ought to,
dare, need

The class of the lexical verbs can be divided into subclasses in different
ways. Tran Huu Manh [25, pp36,37] introduces four main types of
subclassification: the distinction between dynamic and stative verbs based on the
meaning of the verb ; the distinction between intensive and extensive verbs; the
classification in terms of their complementation and word formation. The
classification of lexical verbs based on their complementation is exemplified in the
diagram below:
Diagram 2 Lexical verbs

Transitive
Intensive

Intransitive

Monotransitive

Ditransitive

Complex-

Be, appear, look,
become, get , run

Come, go, live,
come in, go out

Ask, answer , get
, give up

Give, take, in
form of

transitive
Call, elect, make
, put

(SVC/SVA)

(SV)

(SVO)

(SVOO)

(SVOC/SVOA)

(intensive
(zero
Monotransitive
(ditransitive
complementation) complementation) complementation complementation)

Complex transitive
complementation
)

This paper, which investigates the syntax of SET PVs, will treat PVs as
lexical verbs. Classification of SET PVs will be made on the basis of their
complemention, one out of four ways of classification of lexical verbs as introduced

by Tran Huu Manh above.

13


2.3.2. English phrasal verbs
2.3.2.1. Definitions of phrasal verbs
PVs are undoubtedly a very important part of the English language. They
always remain a topic of peculiar importance and have drawn a significant amount
of attention from linguists worldwide. Along the years, they have been much
studied, which have been titled with different labels by different linguists such as
Randolph Quirk (1972), Dehé (2002) or Celce-Murcia and Larsen-Freeman (1999),
etc… However, the term most frequently used in pedagogical approaches and EFL
course books, the label “PVs” will be decided upon to be used in this paper.
There are quite a number of definitions put forward by various authors. The
expression “PVs” refers, in English grammar, to a combination of a verb and a
preposition of adverbial particle, in which the combination often takes on a meaning
which is apparently not the simple sum of its parts.
Longman Dictionary of Phrasal Verbs defines PVs as idiomatic combination
of a verb and an adverb, or a verb and a preposition, or verb with both adverb and
preposition.
Grammarian Eduard Vlad [9, p93] describes PVs as combinations of a
lexical verb and adverbial particle. Verbs as give up, fall out… are considered by
him to be multi-word verbs that are equivalent to one lexical item. Quirk et al.[21,
p1150] considers them a unit which behaves to some extent either lexically or
syntactically as a single verb.
In short, numerous definitions of PVs have been presented. However, it can
be identically referred that a PV consists of a verb and a particle, which can be
either a preposition or an adverb and behaves as a single lexical unit with its own
syntactic and semantic features.

In this paper, the writer will examine SET PVs basing herself on the
theoretical framework that was developed by Quirk R. Phrasal verbs will be
considered a lexical unit which behaves to some extent either lexically or
syntactically as a single verb.

14


2.3.2.2. Particles
As mentioned above, the words which follow the lexical verbs in PVs are
given the neutral designation particles. They are morphologically invariable and
actually belong to two distinct but overlapping categories, that of prepositions and
that of spatial adverbs. The classification of particles can be organized as can be
seen in the table below:
Table 2.1: The categorization of particles
Particles
Prepositions only

Against, among, as, at, beside, for, from, into, of, onto,
upon, with …

Spatial adverbs only

Aback, ahead, apart, aside, away, back, forward, out

Either prepositions or About, above, across, after, along, around, by, down, in,
spatial adverbs
off, on, out, over, through, up …

The most obvious criteria to distinguish the prepositions from the adverbs is

the need to be followed by a noun phrase or not. In other words, if a particle is a
preposition, it must require a following noun phrase as a complement whereas there
is no such requirement for adverbs.
[1]

Jack fell down the hill.

[2]

Jack fell down.

“down” is a preposition in sentence [1] and an adverb in sentence [2].

2.3.2.3. Phrasal verbs and prepositional verbs
Bearing in mind the fact that particles and prepositions are morphologically
identical, we also need to make a clear distinction between PVs (verb - particle) and
prepositional verbs (verb + preposition), (hereafter abbreviated as PrVs) which
seem to be easy to confuse one with the other.
According to Randolph Quirk [21,p1166], PVs are made different from
PrVs, a similar-looking construction by six major features as follows:

15


a) With a PV, there can be an object movement, which means the object can be
placed before or after the particle but this movement is unacceptable with a PrV.



[3a]

[3b]

She turned off the stove
She turned the stove off



[3c]

She looked at the picture.

*

[3d] She looked the picture at.

b) In terms of pronoun placement, a pronoun always precedes the particle in case of
a PV and follows the preposition of the PrV.


[4a]

*

[4b] She turned off it.

*

[4c] She looked it at.

She turned it off.

c) In terms of adverb insertion, an adverb can be placed between the verb and the
preposition of the PrV but not with a PV.


[5a]

He broke completely with his girlfriend.

*

[5b]

He broke completely up the party.

d) In terms of inversion, it is possible to place the adverb before the verb but with a
PV, it is impossible.


[6a] Out came the sun.

*

[6b] Up it blew.

e) The particle of a PV cannot precede a relative pronoun at the beginning of a
relative clause.

*

[7a] The person with whom he disagreed.
[7b] The person in whom did he take

f) The particle of a PV cannot precede the interrogative word at the beginning of a
wh- question.
 [8a] With whom did he disagree?

16