Phrasal verb + ?

Status
Not open for further replies.

Linguist__

Senior Member
Joined
Dec 11, 2009
Member Type
Student or Learner
Friends, I am analysing some sentences of a child with language disorder. So, you may get some questions about grammar from me in the next little while until I'm done. :)

This is my first problem. His utterance is:

"The naughty bus keeped on going."

We can ignore the error of 'kept' as 'keeped'.

Question 1. Is 'to keep on' a phrasal verb in English? I think it is.

Question 2. If it is a phrasal verb, what is the part of speech that comes after it - 'going' in this instance? Is it a verb (in progressive form) or is it a noun (a gerund)?

Question 3. If the 'going' is a verb in progressive form, would that make 'to keep on' an auxiliary verb? My logic is 'is (aux) + x-ing (progressive)'.

Thank you in advance.
 

corum

Senior Member
Joined
Feb 8, 2010
Member Type
Interested in Language
Native Language
Hungarian
Home Country
Hungary
Current Location
Hungary
My gut reaction to the grammatical question you presented is this:

keep it on. 'keep on' is a separable optional phrasal verb, in my opinion. It means something like 'keep the action going'.

Keep the going on. :tick:
Keep on going. :tick:
Keep it on. :tick:

What is on? I think it functions similarly to 'on' in 'turn it on', in 'turn the lights on'. An adverb; on-off.

The bus kept on something. What was it that it kept on? It was going that it kept on. It kept on going. Gerund.

3. Yeah, it works similarly to an aspect auxiliary, but it is not.
 
Last edited:

ha179

Member
Joined
Jun 3, 2009
Member Type
Student or Learner
Native Language
Vietnamese
Home Country
Vietnam
Current Location
Vietnam
Not a teacher.
I think in this situation 'keep on' is a phrasal verb means 'to continue', and 'going' is a gerund.
 

Linguist__

Senior Member
Joined
Dec 11, 2009
Member Type
Student or Learner
Understand though, that if you say it is a gerund, then it is a noun and would be analysed thus:

The naughty bus kept on going.
S V O
The - determiner
naughty - adjective
bus - noun
kept - main verb
on - verb particle
going - noun

Is this correct - 'going' is a gerund i.e. a noun.

I know that the construction SVO does exist with this particular verb: "The child kept on task." - but, is this the same struction with 'going'? Or is it more like:

The naughty bus kept on going.
S V
The - determiner
naughty - adjective
bus - noun
kept - auxiliary verb
on - verb particle
going - main verb

That is, 'going' is the main verb, not a gerund.
 

Linguist__

Senior Member
Joined
Dec 11, 2009
Member Type
Student or Learner
Another thought:

Is 'kept on' a catenative? In which case, for my analysis purposes, both 'keep on' and 'going' are main verbs.

The way I learned it, catenatives are an exception to the rule 'only one main verb can occur in a ver phrase' - they require another main verb by their nature.

This sounds the most appropriate way to analyse this sentence. Two main verbs - 'kept on' as a catenative, 'going' as progressive.
 

mmasny

Key Member
Joined
Oct 3, 2009
Member Type
Student or Learner
Native Language
Polish
Home Country
Poland
Current Location
Poland
Understand though, that if you say it is a gerund, then it is a noun and would be analysed thus:

The naughty bus kept on going.
S V O
The - determiner
naughty - adjective
bus - noun
kept - main verb
on - verb particle
going - noun

Is this correct - 'going' is a gerund i.e. a noun.

I know that the construction SVO does exist with this particular verb: "The child kept on task." - but, is this the same struction with 'going'? Or is it more like:

The naughty bus kept on going.
S V
The - determiner
naughty - adjective
bus - noun
kept - auxiliary verb
on - verb particle
going - main verb

That is, 'going' is the main verb, not a gerund.

That's an interesting question. I had to think about it for a while to figure out how I felt it before I read it. And I agree with you. I didn't think of it as analogous to 'keep on task'. Now, it seems to me that it was an auxiliary verb to me (which is indeed very surprising).
 

mmasny

Key Member
Joined
Oct 3, 2009
Member Type
Student or Learner
Native Language
Polish
Home Country
Poland
Current Location
Poland
Another thought:

Is 'kept on' a catenative? In which case, for my analysis purposes, both 'keep on' and 'going' are main verbs.

The way I learned it, catenatives are an exception to the rule 'only one main verb can occur in a ver phrase' - they require another main verb by their nature.

This sounds the most appropriate way to analyse this sentence. Two main verbs - 'kept on' as a catenative, 'going' as progressive.
Oh, so they have a name for it! I've just read a wikipedia article about it and it seems you're right.
 

corum

Senior Member
Joined
Feb 8, 2010
Member Type
Interested in Language
Native Language
Hungarian
Home Country
Hungary
Current Location
Hungary
The naughty bus kept on going.
S V
The - determiner
naughty - adjective
bus - noun
kept - auxiliary verb
on - verb particle
going - main verb

That is, 'going' is the main verb, not a gerund.

I see your point and I can partly go along with what you say.

kept - auxiliary verb

Next I am going to show you why I think it is not:

1. In forming negative finite clauses, not comes after the auxiliary:

It kept not on going. -- ungrammatical

2. Contraction is institutionalized, that is, the contracted form of not is cliticised onto the auxiliary. Let us see whether it works:

It keptn't on going. -- ungrammatical

3. If keep is the first verb in the sentence and is an auxiliary, it follows 'keep' is the operator. Does the subject-operator inversion work?

Kept it on going? -- ungrammatical
Kept on it going? -- ungrammatical

4. operator in reduced clauses:

- Kept it on going?
- Yes, it kept. -- ungrammatical

The bus kept going and so did on the plane. -- ungrammatical
The bus kept going and the plane kept too. -- ungrammatical

- predication fronting:
It was said the bus kept on going and on going it kept. -- ungrammatical

-relativized predication:

It was said the bus kept on going, which it kept. -- ungrammatical

5. Pre-adverb position

frequency subjunct like never usually precedes the main verb but follows the auxiliary:

It kept never on going. -- ungrammatical
It kept on never going. -- ungrammatical
It never kept on going. -- correct

'kept' smells like a main verb here.

6. Quantifier position

They will all go. -- correct
They all kept on going. -- correct
They kept all on going. -- ungrammatical

7. Independence of subject

It kept on going. -- correct
He kept on going. -- correct -- semantical independence from the subject (both he and it works)

existential-there construction:

There will be peace. -- correct
There kept on going. -- ungrammatical

8. Most importantly, auxiliaries do not inflect for person and tense.

He wills -- ungrammatical
He keeps -- correct

As you can see, 'keep' fails all the tests for auxiliaries. However, it does no follow that 'keep' in the sentence is a true-blue main verb. You probably know that there is a gradience running through the class of main verbs and auxiliaries. There are verb constructions that are neither fish nor fowl, that is, they have an intermediate status on a gradient between auxiliaries at one end and main verbs on the other. Where is 'keep on' on this scale. That is our task to pinpoint. The battle lines are drawn. Let us proceed at full pelt ahead.


What I am trying to do next is prove that 'keep' and 'on' belong together. Why? Because I think I can prove hands down that 'keep on' cannot occur in any one sentence as the only constituent that even remotely resembles a verb.

'keep on' belongs together:

It [kept on] going.
It [continued] going.

If on is not attached to 'kept', it means it enjoys relative freedom regarding where it sits in the sentence.

Adverbials can take place between any two constituents that are immediatelly controlled by the S node (x-bar syntax).

It kept going on ≠ It kept on going.

In light of the phenomena we have just witnessed here, I have no choice but to yield to the idea that 'keep on' is one.

If it is one, it is the main verb here:

I kept on. :cross:

Because it is :cross:, I am forced to think it is not a main verb. What is it then? It is floating in mid-air. What are called those classes that float somewhere with regard to their verb class statuses?

1. marginal modals
2. modal idioms
3. semi-auxiliaries
4. catenatives

keep on = 1?
keep on = 2?
keep on = 3?
keep on = 4?

What is a marginal modal? What is it? 'used to', ought to', dare', need'.

I keptn't on going. :cross:
Did I keep on going? :tick:
I usedn't smoking? :tick:
I did not used to smoke. :tick:

They behave differently --> no marginal modal.

2. modal idioms: combination auxiliary plus to or adverb -- 'keep on' does not belong here, either.

3. semi-auxiliaries: introduced by 'be' or 'have' -- keep on is not on of them

By process of elimination, we have arrived at the class of catenatives. If 'keep on' were not a catenative, it would belong nowhere, which we no is not true. So, 'keep on' must be a catenative.

What are catenatives? They are the closest group to main verbs amoung the four groups I have listed above.

'keep on' has meaning related to aspect or modality (just like catenatives and main verbs) :tick:

It kept on going.
He kept on going. -- the semantics of the verb is independent from the subject (just like in the case of catenatives and auxiliaries)


Unlike main verb constructions like expect (to), want (to) and attempt (to), catenative verbs are in no way related to the transitive verb construction, in which the verb is followed by a direct object or prepositional object.

He attempted to attack the burglar. = He attempted an attack.
He kept on attacking the burglar. ≠ He kept it on. :?:

substitute for the aspect auxiliary 'be':

He keep on going = (more or less) He is going.
 
Last edited:

whitemoon

Senior Member
Joined
Aug 22, 2006
Member Type
English Teacher
Native Language
Burmese
Home Country
Myanmar
Current Location
Myanmar
I've read all of the posts of this topic.
It is very difficult for me to understand English very well.
'keep on' = continue
'carry on' = continue
'walk on' = continue walking
The first two phrasal verbs are same in meaning, but the third is different. Why?
On the other hand, there are other verbs with 'on'.
Consider on and on, he forgot the ghee melting in his hand.
In this case, 'consider on' = continue considering
Also, 'read on' = continue reading (don't stop)
Why are the different?
Have a good time!
 

corum

Senior Member
Joined
Feb 8, 2010
Member Type
Interested in Language
Native Language
Hungarian
Home Country
Hungary
Current Location
Hungary
I've read all of the posts of this topic.
It is very difficult for me to understand English very well.
'keep on' = continue
'carry on' = continue
'walk on' = continue walking
The first two phrasal verbs are same in meaning, but the third is different. Why?
On the other hand, there are other verbs with 'on'.
Consider on and on, he forgot the ghee melting in his hand.
In this case, 'consider on' = continue considering
Also, 'read on' = continue reading (don't stop)
Why are the different?
Have a good time!

This is my interpretation:

'keep on' in the sentence is not a phrasal verb. Phrasal verbs can stand alone, 'keep on' can't.

My friend passed away yesterday. :tick:
I keep on tomorrow. :cross:

'keep on' is a catenative verb, which is a functional category of verbs hovering between two camps: one is the auxiliary verbs and the other is the main verbs. 'going' in the sentence is the main verb.

He kept on going. = SV
 

mmasny

Key Member
Joined
Oct 3, 2009
Member Type
Student or Learner
Native Language
Polish
Home Country
Poland
Current Location
Poland
I see your point and I can partly go along with what you say.



Next I am going to show you why I think it is not:

1. In forming negative finite clauses, not comes after the auxiliary:

It kept not on going. -- ungrammatical
As you say below, it's better to think that the verb is 'keep on' not just 'keep'.
It kept on not going. -- grammatical (although awkward).
2. Contraction is institutionalized, that is, the contracted form of not is cliticised onto the auxiliary. Let us see whether it works:

It keptn't on going. -- ungrammatical
I can't disagree with that.
3. If keep is the first verb in the sentence and is an auxiliary, it follows 'keep' is the operator. Does the subject-operator inversion work?

Kept it on going? -- ungrammatical
Kept on it going? -- ungrammatical
That's right.
4. operator in reduced clauses:

- Kept it on going?
- Yes, it kept. -- ungrammatical

The bus kept going and so did on the plane. -- ungrammatical (when we cut the 'on' it becomes OK. And we should if we want to think about 'keep on' as the verb we're talking about.
The bus kept going and the plane kept too. -- ungrammatical

- predication fronting:
It was said the bus kept on going and on going it kept. -- ungrammatical

-relativized predication:

It was said the bus kept on going, which it kept. -- ungrammatical

5. Pre-adverb position

frequency subjunct like never usually precedes the main verb but follows the auxiliary:

It kept never on going. -- ungrammatical
It kept on never going. -- ungrammatical
It never kept on going. -- correct

'kept' smells like a main verb here.

6. Quantifier position

They will all go. -- correct
They all kept on going. -- correct
They kept all on going. -- ungrammatical

7. Independence of subject

It kept on going. -- correct
He kept on going. -- correct -- semantical independence from the subject (both he and it works)

existential-there construction:

There will be peace. -- correct
There kept on going. -- ungrammatical
There constructions are not connected to auxiliaries specifically. You can't always use it with an auxiliary and there are also non-auxiliary verbs that can take 'there' before them.
8. Most importantly, auxiliaries do not inflect for person and tense.

He wills -- ungrammatical
He keeps -- correct
Auxiliaries don't have inflected forms? This is the first time I hear it and I can't see how it should be right. Aren't 'were' and 'are' inflected forms of 'be'? Do I understand you right that, in your opinion, inflexion can be done only with affixes in English?
As you can see, 'keep' fails all the tests for auxiliaries. However, it does no follow that 'keep' in the sentence is a true-blue main verb. You probably know that there is a gradience running through the class of main verbs and auxiliaries. There are verb constructions that are neither fish nor fowl, that is, they have an intermediate status on a gradient between auxiliaries at one end and main verbs on the other. Where is 'keep on' on this scale. That is our task to pinpoint. The battle lines are drawn. Let us proceed at full pelt ahead.


What I am trying to do next is prove that 'keep' and 'on' belong together. Why? Because I think I can prove hands down that 'keep on' cannot occur in any one sentence as the only constituent that even remotely resembles a verb.

'keep on' belongs together:

It [kept on] going.
It [continued] going.

If on is not attached to 'kept', it means it enjoys relative freedom regarding where it sits in the sentence.

Adverbials can take place between any two constituents that are immediatelly controlled by the S node (x-bar syntax).

It kept going on ≠ It kept on going.

In light of the phenomena we have just witnessed here, I have no choice but to yield to the idea that 'keep on' is one.

If it is one, it is the main verb here:

I kept on. :cross:

Because it is :cross:, I am forced to think it is not a main verb. What is it then? It is floating in mid-air. What are called those classes that float somewhere with regard to their verb class statuses?

1. marginal modals
2. modal idioms
3. semi-auxiliaries
4. catenatives

keep on = 1?
keep on = 2?
keep on = 3?
keep on = 4?

What is a marginal modal? What is it? 'used to', ought to', dare', need'.

I keptn't on going. :cross:
Did I keep on going? :tick:
I usedn't smoking? :tick: OK??
I did not used to smoke. :tick:

They behave differently --> no marginal modal.

2. modal idioms: combination auxiliary plus to or adverb -- 'keep on' does not belong here, either.

3. semi-auxiliaries: introduced by 'be' or 'have' -- keep on is not on of them

By process of elimination, we have arrived at the class of catenatives. If 'keep on' were not a catenative, it would belong nowhere, which we no is not true. So, 'keep on' must be a catenative.

What are catenatives? They are the closest group to main verbs amoung the four groups I have listed above.

'keep on' has meaning related to aspect or modality (just like catenatives and main verbs) :tick:

It kept on going.
He kept on going. -- the semantics of the verb is independent from the subject (just like in the case of catenatives and auxiliaries)


Unlike main verb constructions like expect (to), want (to) and attempt (to), catenative verbs are in no way related to the transitive verb construction, in which the verb is followed by a direct object or prepositional object.

He attempted to attack the burglar. = He attempted an attack.
He kept on attacking the burglar. ≠ He kept it on. :?:

substitute for the aspect auxiliary 'be':

He keep on going = (more or less) He is going.
This is a very thorough analysis. Some points aroused my doubts, you can see them above. Most of what you said is obviously true and can't be doubted.
 

corum

Senior Member
Joined
Feb 8, 2010
Member Type
Interested in Language
Native Language
Hungarian
Home Country
Hungary
Current Location
Hungary
In 'You are right', are is a primary verb functioning as a main verb.
In 'I am going home', am is a primary verb functioning as an aspect auxiliary. True. It is difficult to have a panoramic view of the vast expanse of grammar, especially when you have a mind like a sieve (I am referring to myself).

I usedn't to smoke. :tick: (I meant this; haste makes waste)

There constructions are not connected to auxiliaries specifically. You can't always use it with an auxiliary and there are also non-auxiliary verbs that can take 'there' before them.

True. That is why I resorted to several tests.
 

Tdol

No Longer With Us (RIP)
Staff member
Joined
Nov 13, 2002
Native Language
British English
Home Country
UK
Current Location
Japan
This is my interpretation:

'keep on' in the sentence is not a phrasal verb. Phrasal verbs can stand alone, 'keep on' can't.

What definition of phrasal verb are you using? They can be transitive or intransitive.
 

corum

Senior Member
Joined
Feb 8, 2010
Member Type
Interested in Language
Native Language
Hungarian
Home Country
Hungary
Current Location
Hungary
What definition of phrasal verb are you using?

Was it a genuine question? What I meant was catenatives can never stand alone, while (intransitive) phrasal verbs can? Furthermore, I was talking about verbal escort, not direct object escort.
 
Last edited:

Tdol

No Longer With Us (RIP)
Staff member
Joined
Nov 13, 2002
Native Language
British English
Home Country
UK
Current Location
Japan
You say phrasal verbs can stand alone, so I asked what your definition of phrasal verb was. Of course it's a genuine question; you are making a statement about phrasal verbs that is patently wrong. Your example of 'passed away' has nothing to do with whether a verb is catenative or not; it's simply an intransitive phrasal verb and doesn't prove anything either way.

I kept on. :cross:
This viewpoint is debatable:
Many would have given up. However, I kept on. :tick: For that matter, you could get rid of 'However'

Is this catenative?
I kept on to the end.
 

mmasny

Key Member
Joined
Oct 3, 2009
Member Type
Student or Learner
Native Language
Polish
Home Country
Poland
Current Location
Poland
I usedn't to smoke. :tick: (I meant this; haste makes waste)
I never heard it, thank you. I'll add that it's nonstandard according to Wiktionary.
 

Tdol

No Longer With Us (RIP)
Staff member
Joined
Nov 13, 2002
Native Language
British English
Home Country
UK
Current Location
Japan
You don't hear usedn't to much now but it was used more in the past, like used you to....
 

bhaisahab

Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Apr 12, 2008
Member Type
Retired English Teacher
Native Language
British English
Home Country
England
Current Location
Ireland
You don't hear usedn't to much now but it was used more in the past, like used you to....
I'm sure I've said this before, but here goes again, "usedn't to" is quite commonly used in Ireland.
 

mmasny

Key Member
Joined
Oct 3, 2009
Member Type
Student or Learner
Native Language
Polish
Home Country
Poland
Current Location
Poland
I've read all of the posts of this topic.
It is very difficult for me to understand English very well.
'keep on' = continue
'carry on' = continue
'walk on' = continue walking
The first two phrasal verbs are same in meaning, but the third is different. Why?
On the other hand, there are other verbs with 'on'.
Consider on and on, he forgot the ghee melting in his hand.
In this case, 'consider on' = continue considering
Also, 'read on' = continue reading (don't stop)
Why are the different?
Have a good time!
What do you mean by 'why'? I'm not sure what you want to know... Do you want somebody to compare their coming to life processes?
 

Tdol

No Longer With Us (RIP)
Staff member
Joined
Nov 13, 2002
Native Language
British English
Home Country
UK
Current Location
Japan
I'm sure I've said this before, but here goes again, "usedn't to" is quite commonly used in Ireland.
Thanks- I'll try not to make you have to say it again. :up:
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top