6

Most dictionaries seem to describe 'there' as an adverb. Oxford online dictionary definition Is this true?

"Last year we went to Paris. We stayed there for three nights."

In sentences like this 'there' is taking the place of a preposition and a noun - in this case 'in Paris'. So why is it referred to as an adverb?

Is there a case for describing it as a preposition? It is a substitute for a prepositional phrase ('on the table'. 'in the room', 'to Paris', 'in Paris' etc), and like a preposition, and unlike an adverb, it may be modified by 'right' or 'straight'. "We flew straight there." "The book is right there - in front of you." Prepositional phrases

So, is 'there' (and I suppose we could extend this to its interrogative: 'where') an adverb, a preposition or some other category of word?

tchrist
  • 134,759
thecrease
  • 631
  • 1
    It is an adverb because it takes the place of an adverbial prepositional phrase; i.e. taken as a whole, in Paris acts adverbially. – Anonym Jul 08 '14 at 22:50
  • Analysing locatives and directionals can get messy. In 'Is Peter home yet?', 'home' seems more akin to an adverb than anything else in the traditional armoury – but is one allowed to use an adverb with 'be'? I'm happiest with 'locative (/directional) particle', though not totally convinced. – Edwin Ashworth Jul 08 '14 at 22:57
  • Related: http://english.stackexchange.com/q/111058 http://english.stackexchange.com/q/112556 http://english.stackexchange.com/q/75491 where you may, or may not, discover that there is the *distal deictic locative* in English, just as here is the proximal one. We once had one that was at even further remove — yonder — but it gets scant use in formal writing these days. – tchrist Jul 08 '14 at 23:00
  • 1
    @tchrist I do here such phrases as over yonder, up yonder, down yonder and so on quite frequently where I live, although I rarely use them myself. – Anonym Jul 08 '14 at 23:41
  • @Anonym In I'll see you Tuesday is Tuesday an adverb because it's behaving adverbially? – Araucaria - Him Jul 11 '14 at 01:11
  • @Araucaria That is a tricky one. Since it is (presumably) shortened from on Tuesday, I am unsure of how to analyze it succinctly. That is a discussion deserving more than 500 characters, I think. – Anonym Jul 11 '14 at 01:15
  • @Anonym I agree. Personally, I don't think there's a strong case that words that take the place of 'adverbials' are adverbs - especially as most adverbials aren't adverb phrases. Actually, I have no idea what proportion of post modifying sentence adjuncts are adverbs/adverb phrases ('adverb' not 'adverbial'), but it's quite small, I reckon ... Would need a suitably tagged corpus and lots and lots of time ... – Araucaria - Him Jul 11 '14 at 01:24

3 Answers3

4

As is well-recognised by linguists, dictionaries are not a good place to start when trying to establish parts of speech. A good reference grammar is. Of the three great grammars of the English language from the last hundred years, the most recent and up-to-date is The Cambridge Grammar of the English Language, Huddleston and Pullum, 2002. It says the following:

Locative there is an intransitive preposition contrasting with here: it has deictic and anaphoric uses ... (p. 1319)

(For a fuller account, consult pages 598-691). Part of the reason given for there and here being prepositions is that, exactly as OP has commented, they are modifiable by straight and right. Furthermore, these words function in the same way as other prepositional phrases: they are able to function as locative complements of the verb BE, and also as spacial and temporal adjuncts.

Many phrase types have the latter function, including adverbs and adverb phrases, however adverbs don't generally function as complements of the verb BE. Furthermore adverbs are not modifiable by either right or straight:

Complements of BE

  • The comments were erroneously. * (adverb complement)- wrong
  • The comments were locally. * (adverb complement)- wrong
  • The comments were out of order.
  • The comments were at the bottom.
  • The comments were below.
  • The comments were here.
  • The comments were there.

Straight and right as modifiers.

  • He flew straight beautifully. * (wrong)
  • He flew right directly. * (wrong)
  • He flew straight to Paris.
  • He flew right over the house.
  • He flew straight in.
  • He flew straight there.

This all goes to show that the OP is indeed correct: there does indeed seem to be a preposition.

Hope this is helpful

Araucaria - Him
  • 47,146
  • 3
    Okay, now I understand. H&P have, as usual, created a highly controversial definition of preposition conflicting with the way most others use the term. In their own words: "It should be clear that the term 'preposition' is by no means ideal for our purposes, ..." (p. 602). I wonder why they didn't pick a different word for what is perhaps a useful category/class of words; but it is in character for them to attack all traditional terminology and subvert it by using it to mean very different things. They have every right to do that, but it is perhaps best marked as "preposition_HP", then. – Cerberus - Reinstate Monica Jul 11 '14 at 02:52
  • 2
    @Cerberus Actually, the fact prepositions are still prepositions when they don't take 'objects' is not an observation of H&P's. It's a very, very old idea. It's been talked about by famous linguists like Otto Jespersen (1924), Joseph Emonds (1972), Ray Jackendoff (1973) and since then many, many others. It's what many people would intuitively think anyway. (-Their reassignment of the class of subordinating conjunctions, however, is a different kettle of fish.) As they say, it's a bit difficult to relabel the class of words, the label's just too well established. I'd suggest "relators". – Araucaria - Him Jul 11 '14 at 16:18
3

First a caveat: you cannot always reliably test what function a certain word or phrase has by replacing it with some other word or phrase. However, normal adverbs serve the same function as many prepositional phrases do, so what you said about how it can replace in Paris supports treating there as an adverb.

A preposition occurs before a nominal phrase, like a noun; but there Paris is not possible, unlike in Paris. And so it is not a preposition, unlike the preposition in.

There is often called an adverbial demonstrative pronoun. While it does normally have an adverbial function (it describes where something happens), it has an antecedent: it refers back to a place that was mentioned earlier or that the listener or reader knows is relevant. So in your example, it refers back to Paris, a place; in its capacity of referring back to an antecedent, it is pronominal, functioning like a pronoun.

It is demonstrative because you can point at something while saying it, just like the demonstrative (personal and adjectival) pronouns this, that, those and these: I see that [pointing at object], we went there [pointing at place] etc.

Note that, in certain idiomatic constructions, there has almost evolved into something more like a particle, as in there was noöne in the room.

The words straight and right in your example are a bit complicated; they could be analysed in different ways. The two most obvious ways would be to either classify them as adverbs modifying there, or as adverbs modifying the verb in parallel with there. The simplest structure of I flew straight there would be the latter: how did you fly? I flew straight, not via some other point. Where did you fly? There. Those are two adverbs, one of manner and one of place/destination.

Cerberus - Reinstate Monica
  • 61,585
  • Note that -- as a good dictionary will tell you, and provide examples of -- the word "there" can be used as an adverb, adjective, pronoun, noun, or interjection. – keshlam Jul 08 '14 at 23:04
  • 2
    @Cerberus Thanks for your explanation. But what do you make of the fact that 'there' can be modified by 'straight' and 'right'? Wouldn't this make it more preposition-like? Could it be classified as a prepositional phrase? – thecrease Jul 08 '14 at 23:05
  • @keshlam: Well, any word can be verbed and many can be adjectivised, etc., so I am just commenting on the basic function of the word as in the example sentence. – Cerberus - Reinstate Monica Jul 08 '14 at 23:06
  • 2
    @keshlam Yes, but I was thinking particularly about the usage of 'there' in the examples I gave. – thecrease Jul 08 '14 at 23:07
  • 1
    @thecrease: There is absolutely no way that there could be a preposition. The fact that it can replace a prepositional phrase does not mean that it can replace a preposition. I'll add a paragraph about straight/right to my answer in a minute... – Cerberus - Reinstate Monica Jul 08 '14 at 23:08
  • In that specific example, I think @Cerberus is correct. My point was that slightly modified examples may shift it into one of the other categories. See, eg, http://www.thefreedictionary.com/there – keshlam Jul 08 '14 at 23:09
  • “This guy right here wants you to throw the ball to that guy over there.” You’ll find that right here and over there are postmodifiers of guy in both cases. But any further pigeon-holing of those pairs into facile grab-bag categories like adwhatever or prowhatever may not work out all that well. – tchrist Jul 08 '14 at 23:16
  • @tchrist: Well, adverbial phrases can often be turned into attributive phrases, commonly of the postpositional kind. The embassy in Constantinople was closed. The match later this week must be cancelled. It's just that adverbial phrases that are derived from (shorter) adjectives normally do not do this (immediately → his immediate recovery; fervently → her fervent pleas), but in general it is possible. – Cerberus - Reinstate Monica Jul 08 '14 at 23:21
  • 2
    So 'in Paris' is an adverb, not a prepositional phrase? – thecrease Jul 08 '14 at 23:27
  • @thecrease: It is an adverbial phrase, but also a prepositional phrase. I know, it sounds confusing. Adverbial phrase describes the function of the phrase as a whole, as a constituent of the sentence. You could say it is a description of its "external" function. Prepositional phrase, however, describes its "internal" structure: it just means any phrase governed by a preposition, so any phrase beginning with a preposition. The "internal" structure has no bearing on its "external" function, there is no direct relation. I know, "phrase" is a bit of a vague term. – Cerberus - Reinstate Monica Jul 08 '14 at 23:31
  • @thecrease 'In Paris' is structurally a prepositional phrase. In 'John lives in Paris' it's functioning adverbially; in 'The bookshops in Paris are very expensive' it's functioning adjectivally. – Edwin Ashworth Jul 08 '14 at 23:31
  • 2
    What about 'The book is right there!' - Is there still an adverb in this case? – thecrease Jul 08 '14 at 23:33
  • 3
    @Cerberus So when we classify 'there' we classify according to its external function rather than its internal structure, making 'there' an adverb in 'He went there last year' and 'there' an adjective in 'The man over there is my friend', despite the fact that in both cases it's implied internal structure is a prepositional phrase - to that place, in that place etc? – thecrease Jul 08 '14 at 23:42
  • 1
    @thecrease Please stop calling things like here and there prepositional phrases. For that to be true, they would have to be at least two words, and one of them a substantive serving as the preposition’s object. That does not occur here, there, or anywhere. – tchrist Jul 08 '14 at 23:54
  • @thecrease: In the book is right there, it is still a (predicative) adverb, indicating the location where the book is. // Yes, more or less. There is no such thing as an "implied internal structure": the word there has no internal structure to speak of, there is no preposition in it. Just because the same thought can be expressed with a prepositional phrase—which is only about external function—doesn't mean there has anything to to with prepositions internally. – Cerberus - Reinstate Monica Jul 09 '14 at 00:37
  • 2
    If you want to call it an adverb, feel free. Calling it one thing or another does not change its nature or properties. It's a deictic locative predicate, and like home or school and other locatives, it can be used alone adverbially. This does not mean that home, school, or there are adverbs, in some sacramental sense; it just means they can occur in a wide variety of places in the sentence. – John Lawler Jul 09 '14 at 00:40
  • @JohnLawler: If you want to call it a deictic locative predicate, feel free. Calling it one thing or another does not change its nature or properties. As I said above, any word can be verbed and many can be adjectivised, etc., so I am just commenting on the basic function of the word as in the example sentence. – Cerberus - Reinstate Monica Jul 09 '14 at 00:48
  • 2
    Thank you, I will. One term is descriptive, and the other term is vague. – John Lawler Jul 09 '14 at 00:54
  • @JohnLawler: I think both deictic locative predicate and adverbial demonstrative pronoun are in some ways clear and in some ways vague. Demonstrative is much the same as deictic in this context (although deictic is usually more limited that the way you use it here). Locative is indeed more precise; I could say locative adverbial demonstrative pronoun. Predicate is rather vague; the word has many meanings. Adverb, too, is somewhat vague (though not in this context, I believe). Pronoun is I think very clear. – Cerberus - Reinstate Monica Jul 09 '14 at 01:15
  • @Cerberus: Actually, predicate is very well-defined, but it's more of a logical term than a grammatical one. Sure; it's all of these things, in one way or another. But only a few are relevant in any given situation. The problem wouldn't arise if we didn't hafta write about things instead of just giving examples of what we mean. – John Lawler Jul 09 '14 at 02:24
  • 2
    @tchrist That's odd I don't understand your logic there. Noun phrases are still noun phrases when there is only one word. Verb phrases are called verb phrases when there is only one word. Adjectives are called adjective phrases when they are only one word... – thecrease Jul 09 '14 at 08:39
  • @JohnLawler: Absolutely, examples are the best. In (predicate) logic, predicates are very well defined, as you say. If only language were logical (most of the time)! I tend to look at syntax as being on a lower level than logic, which is more...semantic. – Cerberus - Reinstate Monica Jul 09 '14 at 14:18
  • 1
    @Cerberus 'Adverbial' is a terrible term. As you yourself have demonstrated, it always results in a confusion of form and function. However, calling so-called adverbials adverbs is certainly unforgivable! And calling prepositional phrases adverbials when they are functioning adjectivally should be a criminal offence! One last thing, adverbs don't generally function as Predicative Complements of BE. * *"He is beautifully", *"The elephant is enormously.", "Your comment is erroneously"*. – Araucaria - Him Jul 10 '14 at 17:46
  • 1
    @Cerebrus Words that 'replace' phrases, or function as pro-forms, often do have the same category as the head of that phrase. So pronouns 'replace' large complex NPs. Pro-form DO which is generally used to replace VPs, is itself a verb. It's not unreasonable to suggest that a word that functions as a PP is in fact a preposition. It is unreasonable to suggest that, because we like to call PPs adverbials, the category of a word functioning like a PP is an adverb -especially if that PP is functioning as a predicative complement of the verb BE. Adverbs don't generally have this function. – Araucaria - Him Jul 10 '14 at 18:01
  • 1
    @Cerberus, Araucaria, tchrist So now we can all agree and have a happy solution - 'there' is preposition? It was an exiting fight like a rumba in the jungle Muhammed Ali and George Formby but there is only once a winner in the life. And despite he lost Mr George made good cooker and a lot money after so there is much silver on the cloud. – The Beefer Fan Jul 10 '14 at 22:38
  • 1
    @Araucaria: A prepositional phrase, i.e. a preposition with its object, cannot function as a preposition. That position is in my opinion completely indefensible. I don't think you mean that. // Adverbs can very well function as subject complements with copulae, like to be: the meeting is tomorrow, she is far away, she is nearby, she is well, she is here, etc. The same applies to normal adverbial phrases (which are normally prepositional phrase): *she is at work, Paris is in France, I am behind you, etc. ... – Cerberus - Reinstate Monica Jul 10 '14 at 22:51
  • ... You could say there is an intermediate step in such examples, where the adverbial constituent is first turned into a kind of predicative adjectival phrase. This is not possible with adverbs on -ly, because in those cases the plain adjective (minus -ly) is used as a subject complement. // @TheBeeferFan No, I absolutely cannot agree with that: saying that there is a preposition is in my opinion absolutely impossible. As to your example, I don't understand it; it is not standard English. – Cerberus - Reinstate Monica Jul 10 '14 at 22:53
  • @Araucaria The terms nominal phrase and prepositional phrase are different kinds of terms, which is perhaps what confuses some people. A noun phrase is one that externally functions as a noun. But a prepositional phrase is one that is internally introduced by a preposition; the name says nothing about its external function, as a constituent in the sentence. There can be no doubt that prepositional phrases often function as adverbial constituent, sometimes as adjectival constituents (through the intermediate step above). – Cerberus - Reinstate Monica Jul 10 '14 at 22:58
  • @TheBeeferFan Yes, absolutely correct – Araucaria - Him Jul 11 '14 at 00:20
  • @Cerberus Hmmm ... Tomorrow is Noun Phrase (like other noun phrases every day, Tuesday, three times a week etc); far away is a prepositional phrase with the preposition away modified by the adjective far; nearby is a preposition [right nearby]; well with this usage is an adjective meaning literally healthy; here as described is a preposition ... (imo) – Araucaria - Him Jul 11 '14 at 00:52
  • 1
    @Cerberus I don't agree at all. I'll see you after versus I'll see you after the concert. In both cases the Preposition Phrases are acting as adjuncts in the sentence. The first is a preposition on its own, the second a preposition with an object. The function is exactly the same - ie adjunct. – Araucaria - Him Jul 11 '14 at 00:59
  • @Araucaria: All of those words and phrases I mentioned are traditionally and by most people considered clear adverbs. A preposition, from pre- and position, has a position before a noun phrase, by definition. There are many words that can be a preposition in one sentence and an adverb in another, such as I am in the corner (prep.) v. I am in (adv.). One could argue that the latter is an elliptical preposition, for in [the house]; but this conflicts with the widely preferred theory that the common prepositions evolved out of ancient adverbs. – Cerberus - Reinstate Monica Jul 11 '14 at 02:45
  • @Cerberus: in all seriousness, doesn't 'there' kind of act like a pronoun? – Mitch Jul 11 '14 at 02:55
  • @Mitch: Hence my *adverbial demonstrative pronoun* above. – Cerberus - Reinstate Monica Jul 11 '14 at 03:42
  • Oh. My bad. I somehow failed to read the highlighted thing. Anyway, I feel like everybody is right. Shouldn't we be arguing about world peace where everybody is obviously wrong? – Mitch Jul 11 '14 at 12:14
  • Are you saying that there is a pronoun or an adverb? An adverbial pronoun, is a pronoun, not an adverb. – Araucaria - Him Jul 12 '14 at 00:17
  • @Araucaria: It is both at the same time: externally, it is adverbial, but internally it has a strong pronominal aspect, since it refers to an (implied or explicit) antecedent. – Cerberus - Reinstate Monica Jul 12 '14 at 04:56
  • 1
    @Cerberus But being "adverbial" doesn't make something an adverb! – Araucaria - Him Jul 12 '14 at 20:30
  • @Araucaria: How do you mean? If a word is used adverbially, that means it is used as an adverb, which means it is an adverb in that sentence? – Cerberus - Reinstate Monica Jul 12 '14 at 23:49
  • Well, not really. You've got its function (like its job) and then you've got its category (like what kind of animal). So, subject for example is a 'job'/function and *Noun* is a category. Notice Nouns can have different functions. They can be either subjects, objects, adjuncts etc. In *I eat bagels every week, we have the following functions: subject, predicator, object, adjunct. Adverbial* is just a different word for adjunct. The adverbial in that sentence was every week. What ‘animal’ or category of phrase? Verb Phrase? Adverb Phrase? Adjective Phrase? A Noun Phrase. – Araucaria - Him Jul 13 '14 at 10:03
  • That's why the word 'adverbial' isn't very helpful. It means 'sentence adjunct'. One category of word that often fullfils this function is Adverbs. The term 'adverbial' just means doing the job of adjunct ( -like an adverb would). It's confusing because the category of word/phrase may have nothing to do with adverbs at all. Also 'Adverb' is not a function any more than 'Noun'. It is a category of word/part of speech. – Araucaria - Him Jul 13 '14 at 10:08
0

There is an adverb of place, and an adverb is used to modify a verb. In the sentence— We stayed there for three nights, stay is a verb and there is modifying it. it's answering us the question— where did we stay? To make the sentence more understandable a semi colon could have been put between both the sentences.

Surabhi Kalhan
  • 1