0

Why "I will call you back" instead of "I will call back you"? Here "call back" is a phrasal verb, and "back" is a particle. Then why are we separating the particle?

Is there any rule for it?

WS2
  • 64,657
zafor ahmed
  • 39
  • 1
  • 2
  • 4

1 Answers1

1

The variability of the position of the particle is, I suppose, conventional. I am not aware of any rule for it.

'I will make up the bed' converts to 'I will make the bed up'. Or 'I will close down the business' can be 'I will close the business down'. As regards 'back': 'We will get back the deposit' could equally be 'we will get the deposit back'.

But 'We walked down the road' can never be 'We walked the road down'. In the same way 'I will call you back' cannot be 'I will call back you'.

There are multitudes of these which it might be worth exploring.

WS2
  • 64,657
  • And as a further example, "I need to call back the landlord," sounds acceptable to me, but, "I need to call back him," does not. So also, neither "we will get back it," nor, "I will make up it" are correct. With the exception of your last example (which I believe is something else entirely), pronouns seem to prefer placement between the verb and particle. – Wlerin Jun 01 '14 at 08:48
  • 4
    “We walked down the road” is not a phrasal verb; it is just a verb followed by a prepositional phrase ‘down the road’. Similarly, you cannot say, “I will give it you to”, etc.; but you can topicalise the prepositional phrase: “Down the road we walked”, “to you I will give it”, which we cannot do with a phrasal verb: *“Back the landlord I will call” (vel sim). – Janus Bahs Jacquet Jun 01 '14 at 08:52
  • @JanusBahsJacquet But you could say 'back he quickly called with the answer'; couldn't you? – WS2 Jun 01 '14 at 08:58
  • I suppose you could … though I’d at least put a question mark before it. It’s borderline ungrammatical to me. I’d certainly never say it, and though I’d understand it, hearing it used in conversation would definitely be a thing that makes me go “hmm”. – Janus Bahs Jacquet Jun 01 '14 at 09:01
  • @WS2 You could... but not "Back the landlord he quickly called with the answer'. The issue is more the fronting of the object, I suspect, than the particle. Or perhaps, the fronting of both at once (I think you could get away with just the object if you left the particle where it belongs). – Wlerin Jun 01 '14 at 09:01
  • 1
    On further review, the issue is that the particle and the direct object are separate pieces. They cannot both be topicalised at once, whereas the entire prepositional phrase can be. You can topicalise "back", or you can topicalise "the landlord", but not both, as in "Back the landlord he quickly called with the answer." Any of "With the answer he quickly called back the landlord", "The landlord he quickly called back with the answer", and "Back he quickly called the landlord with the answer" would be just dandy, though. – Wlerin Jun 01 '14 at 09:09
  • @Wlerin If you were trying to avoid ending a sentence with a preposition, once de rigueur, you could say 'Back he quickly called', though 'up with that you might not feel inclined to put'! – WS2 Jun 01 '14 at 09:44
  • @WS2 But back is not a preposition? And neither for that matter is the "up" in that apocryphal phrase. – Wlerin Jun 02 '14 at 00:59
  • @Wlerin But working as prepositions? I wouldn't know. I do not profess to be a grammarian like some on this site. – WS2 Jun 02 '14 at 07:39
  • Some verb + adverb and verb + preposition constructions are just that; some constructions that look just like them are actually multi-word verbs. Of these, the transitive ones may be optionally separable, obligatorily separable, or inseparable. – Edwin Ashworth Jun 02 '14 at 09:19