Omitting a preposition before non-measure phrases

In the last subsection we described how a preposition can be inserted before an O NP which is not saliently affected by the activity, or when it does not have specific reference.

There are also instances of what could be called the opposite kind of circumstance. If the referent of a peripheral NP, marked by a preposition, is particularly salient in some instance of an activity, then it may drop its preposition and move to a position immediately after the verb, becoming direct object. As we shall show, this can happen with both intransitive and transitive verbs.

A Locus description can—but need not—be included with a verb from the RUN subtype of MOTION, e.g. jump (over the log), climb (up the mountain), swim (across the stream). If the activity could be considered a significant achievement, with regard to the nature of the Locus, then the preposition can be omitted and the Locus NP moved to a position immediately after the (now transitive) verb, as its direct object. They climbed up the mountain leaves open whether they got to the top, but They climbed the mountain indicates that the pinnacle was reached. The preposition-less construction would be likely to be used when it was a difficult mountain to climb—one would surely always say They climbed Everest, with no up, but We climbed up the little hill in the south-east corner of Regent’s Park, with up included. Similar considerations apply to swim—She swam the English Channel, a considerable achievement which is marked by having the English Channel as direct object, as opposed to She swam across the millstream, which anyone who can swim at all can do, and here the Locus is marked by preposition across.

Jump may be used for motion up (jump up onto the ledge) or down (jump down off/from the ledge) or over some vertical obstacle (jump over the fence) or over a discontinuity in the ground (jump over the brook) or it can just refer to a mode of locomotion (jump around the garden). Only the preposition over can be omitted, and then just when the vertical obstruction or the discontinuity in the ground poses a definite challenge (which not everyone could meet). Thus, She jumped the six-foot fence/the wide ravine but not, because of the piffling nature of the obstruction, *She jumped the snail/the ten-inch gap in the path (these sentences require over). A best-selling Australian autobiography was called I Can Jump Puddles; the author, Alan Marshall, had been crippled by polio and for him jumping a puddle represented a significant achievement, thus he omitted the preposition before puddles.

Any verb from the RUN subtype may have the Locus promoted from a prepositional NP to be direct object, if that Locus is in some way significant for the activity; for many verbs there is no such Locus, e.g. crawl, stroll, roll. With other RUN verbs a degree of contextualization is necessary. A professional golfer, on the day before a big tournament at an unfamiliar location, is likely to walk (over) the course. Here the preposition may be dropped, not because this is any sort of achievement (in the way that swimming the Channel is) but because the salient fact here is not just his walking, but his walking-the-course, looking at the lie of the land from every angle.

Intransitive verbs from other subtypes may occasionally drop a preposition in appropriate circumstances. The CORPOREAL verb pee can take a prepositional NP indicating where the stream of urine was directed, e.g. He peed into the potty. But in He peed (into) his pants the preposition can be omitted, since the pants are saliently affected by the activity. (This construction is similar to He wet his pants.)

We described how speak and talk may omit the preposition before a Medium NP, e.g. speak (in) French. This is likely to happen when the Medium itself is being focused on—compare The President spoke some harsh words in French to his secretary (the harsh words are the focus of this sentence) with They speak French in that bank, or French is spoken in that bank (the fact of that language being spoken there is focused upon). Another example is Can you really speak Fijian?, where being able to converse in that language is being highlighted, as an unusual feat.

The basic syntactic frame for GIVING verbs is with the Gift as O and with the Recipient marked by preposition to. But when the Recipient is the most salient non-A role it can drop its preposition and move into direct object slot, immediately after the verb. Compare:

(8) I’ve lent all my phonetics books to different people

(9) I’ve lent my favorite student a bunch of different sorts of books

Sentence (8) focuses on the specific NP all my phonetics books whereas (9) directs attention onto my favorite student. In a construction like (9) the original O NP (the Gift) is still retained, as a sort of ‘second object’. (There are similar syntactic possibilities with verbs from the TELL subtype of SPEAKING.

As we mentioned, borrow is the converse of lend. But here the Gift must be O, e.g. John borrowed a book from Mary. Borrow and related verbs (e.g. buy, purchase) focus on what is given, and this cannot be displaced from the object slot by the Donor.

We mentioned the construction That free kick won/lost the match for us, with win and lose from the COMPETITION type. Here the NP marked by for can be focused on, and moved into direct object slot, e.g. That free kick won/lost us the match.

Search for can be considered an inherent preposition verb, similar to refer to. A location can be specified, by a prepositional NP, e.g. He searched for his wallet in the field. This verb allows a location NP to drop its preposition and move into direct object slot if the location is somehow significant and worth focusing on, e.g. He searched (in) forty-three different places for his wallet (before eventually finding it).

We have thus far examined instances of ‘prepositional omission’ with intransitive verbs (jump, climb, swim, walk, pee, speak), with transitive verbs (GIVING, the TELL subtype of SPEAKING, win and lose from COMPETITION), and with an inherent preposition transitive verb (search for from ATTENTION). In each case the omission takes place in circumstances particular to the type or subtype.

There is one general circumstance in which a preposition can be omitted (with the NP it governed becoming direct object). This involves for + NP (or, sometimes, to + NP) with the benefactive sense ‘for NP to get’. Thus:

(10a) I cut a slice of bread for Mary

(10b) I cut Mary a slice of bread

(11a) I brought an apple for Mary

(11b) I brought Mary an apple

(12a) I knitted a jumper for Mary

(12b) I knitted Mary a jumper

(13a) I threw an apple to Mary

(13b) I threw Mary an apple

(14a) I chose a book for Mary

(14b) I chose Mary a book

(15a) I recommended a good thriller to Mary

(15b) I recommended Mary a good thriller

A benefactive NP of this kind may omit the for or to and become direct object (displacing the original direct object to become ‘second object’), with a variety of verbs from at least MOTION, AFFECT, DECIDING and SPEAKING. The ‘beneficiary’ can, in appropriate circumstances, be regarded as the most salient non-A role with these verbs.

Note that each of the (a) sentences quoted has two senses: (i) for Mary to get the slice of bread/apple/jumper/etc.; and (ii) the activity being done on behalf of Mary—suppose Mary was meant to slice the bread but I did it instead. The NP governed by for can be promoted to direct object only in sense (i), not (ii).

Now consider verbs of giving. We can have:

(16a)   John (Donor) sold a book (Gift) to Fred (Recipient) for Mary (Beneficiary) (i.e. for Fred to give it to Mary)

(16b)   John (Donor) sold Fred (Recipient) a book (Gift) for Mary (Beneficiary)

(17a) Fred (Recipient) bought a book (Gift) (from John (Donor)) for Mary (Beneficiary)

As described above, we have the possibility in (16a) of promoting the Recipient to O slot, if it is sufficiently salient—as in (16b). It is perhaps in view of this that with verbs like sell, lend and give, the Beneficiary may not become object. (On hearing *John sold Mary a book to Fred—derived from (16a) by promotion of Mary—one would interpret the first five words as implying that Mary was the Recipient, and then be confused by the final to Fred.) But, as noted above, the Donor cannot be promoted to object in (17). Here the beneficiary may be promoted, in the same way that it can be with cut, bring, knit, etc., i.e.

(17b)   Fred (Recipient) bought Mary (Beneficiary) a book (Gift) (from John (Donor))

But note that while construction (17b) is fully acceptable with buy, it is more marginal with the syntactically and semantically related verb borrow,? Fred borrowed Mary a book (from John). This may be because people often buy things to give them to someone else, whereas it is rare to borrow something from someone and then pass it on to a third person.

In summary, a non-measure NP that is normally marked by a preposition (and is a peripheral part of the activity) may lose its preposition and be moved into object slot if it is being focused on, as a particularly salient element, in some instance of the activity.