11

Actually, the metaphors are all coherent, so there is a logic to it. As Colin explained in his comment, and as discussed in this post, Months and larger measures are Containers -- 3-Dimensional: in 1949, in June, in this century Days are Surfaces -- 2-Dimensional: on Thursday, on Thanksgiving, on this occasion Smaller measures are Points on a 1-...


11

Modern academic English grammars now usually recognise prepositions as a class of words which just like nouns, verbs, adjectives and adverbs head their own phrases, have their own distribution and tend to take the same kinds of modifiers and other dependents. In the same way that verbs often take NP Complements which are often referred to as Objects, so do ...


10

German does have something like this: (list of abbreviations see below) Wo-r-auf hast du ein Spielzeug gelegt? where-ITF-on have you a toy put.PSTPTCP Where did you put a toy on? Wo-von ernähren sich Hasen? where-of live.on REFLPRN rabbits What do rabbits live on? Wo-nach riecht das? where-after smells that What does this smell like?...


10

Semantically (in terms of meaning)? There's no real difference. Some languages might use an adposition for a certain meaning, while other languages use noun case. The underlying meaning can be exactly the same. Syntactically, though—in terms of putting words together into sentences—there's one major difference. The case is part of a noun, and can't be ...


9

According to the Tok Pisin Wikibook, Tok Pisin does have compound prepositions beyond the two "basic" prepositions. There are two basic prepositions in Tok Pisin: bilong and long. bilong is used for attribution. Examples: haus bilong mi, My home; Han bilong diwai, Arm of a tree; branch. long is used as a universal preposition for other meanings. ...


7

Your 'rules' mix traditional and contemporary grammars. It's true in both traditional and contemporary grammars that a preposition phrase [PP] consists of a preposition and an object; but in contemporary grammars PPs 'establish relations' between constituents, not as in traditional grammar 'words'. Your third rule acknowledges this in defining the object of ...


6

The head of a phrase ought to affect the category of that phrase. In turn, we can estimate whether phrases are of different categories by examining facts of verb subcategorization. Paradigms like He fell into the hole *He fell the hole. suggest that "into the hole" and "the hole" are of different categories, which will be true if the preposition "...


6

That's what is called "infinitival to" and it's not consider a preposition.


5

Most prepositions are originally, most likely, nouns of their own, in different fossizilied case forms that preceeded or followed the corresponding noun. For example, Latin pro, de are IIRC believed to stem from ablative forms prod, ded. Coincidentally, they also require ablative. So, a preposition was originally some sort of abstract apposition to the noun ...


5

My assumption from Turkish is that agglutinative languages have this property. For example: Oyuncağı nereye koydun? Word by word: TheToy whon youput In Turkish "Ne" means What, but also is used as wh. Ne + rede means in Where, Ne + den means for What.


5

I want him to run. "To" is not a preposition here but a subordinator that serves as a marker of to- infinitival clauses. "Want" is a catenative verb and this is a catenative construction where the subordinate infinitival clause "to run" is catenative complement of "want". "Him" is the direct object of "want" and the understood (semantic) subject of "run". ...


5

Maybe this isn't a universal distinction, since other answers do not mention it, and I apologize if it's too Indo-European centric, but I understand a major difference between cases and adpositions (even though postpositions can look a lot like cases) is that the forms of adpositions can be predicted from the phrase they are attached to; they behave as words,...


4

In French, dishes "à la" stands for "à la façon de" which you could translate as "in the style of". So, "à la bourguignonne" means as it's done in that area of France. Same idea for the other languages. But sometimes the words "à la", "au", or "aux" point to some ingredients. For example: in "Courgettes farcies au saumon", the last part indicates that ...


4

The etymology is fairly straightforward. The temporal meaning of before is secondary to the spatial meaning. This is very common across all prepositions of time: at (5am), in (5 mins), on (Wednesday), between (3 and 4), from - to, through. The Conceptual Metaphor theory posits a TIME IS SPACE metaphor that is present across many languages and many parts of ...


4

Things are called particles when they undergo the rule Particle Shift. "Particle" is an ad hoc POS made up to fill the need for a notation to use to describe when the rule works. It is not a happy event when a syntactician has to invent a new special category just to make his rules work, but what can one do? Anyone with a better idea should bring it forth ...


4

Conjuctions, as you say, connect sentences and clauses, but also phrases and single words. Examples are and, or, but, because, neither ... nor, rather ... than, etc. Single-word conjunctions are usually placed inbetween the two parts they combine, such as in [the man] *and* [the woman] or [Mary is not at home] or [she is already asleep], multi-word ...


4

"Here" is not a preposition per se. By definition, prepositions come before a noun phrase (or determiner phrase) to create prepositional phrases: He was (in (the house)). They saw him (with (a knife)). "Here" cannot do this. *He was here the house. *They saw him here a knife. However... "Here" does act quite a bit like a ...


4

The word "to" in English basically has three different unrelated uses. Historically they're not entirely unrelated, but it's easiest to think of them nowadays as homophones instead of the same word. The first one is as a particle. ("Particle" is short for "it doesn't fit into any other category in the syntax but it's still important".) When followed by an ...


4

If you can access the Oxford English Dictionary, you can see a vast number of meanings of "to", just looking at their "prep., conj., and adv" entry. Thus, "Expressing motion directed towards and reaching: governing a noun denoting the place, thing, or person approached and reached"; "Expressing direction: In the direction of, towards"; "Indicating the limit ...


4

My MA thesis in 1967 was about that. It is "The English preposition WITH".


3

As curiousdannii says, the verb, in English and French is transitive; in fact, ditransitive. But in a larger sense the answer, as usual with "Why" questions, is BECAUSE THAT'S HOW IT IS. Languages are full of redundancies, half-statements, inexactitudes, and downright illogicalities, because they are created by people doing what people do, not by logicians,...


3

The following illustrates my second answer to this question, which is that "particles" have no part of speech. Earlier descriptions of subcategorization In that first generation of great young desriptivists from MIT, Robert Lees gave arbitrary and artificial category symbols to express restrictions that tree neighbors place on heads. I'm not sure I've got ...


3

You're asking about both constituency and dependency. Constituency: Is "peek into" a phrasal verb or verb+preposition? So do we have [[peeking into][the alley]] or [peeking[into[the alley]]]? You did the right test to deduce "peek into" is not a phrasal verb. Also, no dictionary states "peek into" is a phrasal verb. This leave us with only the second ...


3

It is genetic. Prepositions in Indo-European languages come from adverb-like particles which themselves often come from some sort of noun in a specific case. This adverb could be mostly anywhere in the sentence given the relatively free word order of PIE. In English, many of these adverbs never fully transitioned into pure prepositions as they can stand on ...


3

I write this as an answer because the comment thread is too long already for (what I take to be) the spirit of SE sites. The language used by the author of the question (parameter, wh-movement and the two references to Chomsky) strongly suggests that he wants (or at least is comfortable with) an answer within minimalist linguistic theory. Within this ...


3

Tok Pisin has two prepositions: bilong meaning 'of' or 'for' (the genitive, essentially) long for everything else


3

The word in front of a preposition can be the head that governs the prepositional phrase, but it doesn't have to be. Only the position after a preposition marks a special syntactic function; that is called a prepositional object or the object of a proposition, like Berlin, France, wheat in your examples.


3

ὀψέ has survived in Modern Cypriot Greek, as the adverb ψες "last night". (The deletion of initial unstressed o- is semi-regular; the addition of final -s to adverbs is also semi-regular.) "late" > "(last) night" is a common semantic transition; cf Spanish tardes, and for that matter Ancient βραδύ "late" > Modern βράδυ "evening". In Modern Cypriot, as in ...


3

We imagine the time flowing at us from our front to our back, so the future is in front of us and the past is behind us, for us the time flows from the future into the past. I don't know about all the languages, but for those who speak Aymara, a South American language, it is all vice versa, for them the time flows from behind, from the past and into the ...


3

A preposition is a non-phrasal syntactic element which precedes a nominal phrase. A postposition is a non-phrasal syntactic elements which follows a nominal phrase. It differs from a prefix in being a separate word, but the criteria for calling something a prefix versus a word are language- and theory-specific (best dealt with as a separate question). The ...


Only top voted, non community-wiki answers of a minimum length are eligible