It appears as if non-native English speakers learning English are taught about something called "phrasal verbs." A phrasal verb is an idiomatic combination of a verb and a preposition whose meaning cannot be deduced from the meanings of its parts. Examples include: "to break up," "to break down," "to break in," "to break out."
My wife and I learned English grammar in U.S. high schools--in completely different parts of the U.S.--in the 1960s, and things may have changed.
Neither one of us had ever heard of a "phrasal verb." It appears as if native English speakers learn them "by osmosis" long before we study grammar in school; and it appears as if we learn them so well that they have become second nature long before then. I never even thought about them; I'm wasn't aware that I use them; nobody seems to have any trouble learning them, and thus nobody ever teaches them.
At least, that is my experience. I am curious to know if that's true for other native English speakers, or did you learn about "phrasal verbs" when you were studying English in school?
I don't remember learning grammar at all during my school years, and I'd never heard of "phrasal verbs" either until I joined this site.
Great discussion topic. Native English speakers learn the use of phrasal verbs before they even go to school because it is *real* English grammar. Mastering phrasal verbs is therefore of utmost importance to the student of English as a second language who aspires to native competence. Most native speakers are not consciously aware of phrasal verbs, but without such knowledge, one cannot really claim to understand English grammar, even though one may in fact use such forms unconsciously oneself. Btw, when English speakers attempt to translate such phrasal verbs into other (ie non-Germanic) languages, the results are horrendous (or hilarious, depending on your point of view). This is an extremely common error made by English speakers learning other languages.
Part 1
We never even learnt what verbs were - let alone 'phrasal verbs'! But why would we need to? Why would a native speaker need to be 'taught' the difference between 'get up and 'get out'? We can all use the vernacular of our own language.
Why should we be given labels to tools which we can already use proficiently? A English native speaker no more needs to be told that 'Leave it out!' is a phrasal verb than we need to be taught the Latin names of the bones, muscles and tendons in our legs to help us walk. It's an issue of 'need to know'.
We all learnt to walk , through imitation, trial, error and a few bruises, over a long period, without having been taught the terminology of biped locomotion. The only people who need to know the mechanics and associated jargon of the field are medics, physios and suchlike - professionals who teach others, and sort things out for those who need assistance for whatever reason.
I'm glad to know I'm not alone! I think it is <em>completely</em> understandable and sensible that teachers of English as a foreign language would develop names for, and teaching strategies for elements of the language that don't need to be taught to native speakers. But it is surprising that an element of English that is <em>so</em> conspicuous to non-native speakers is <em>so</em> invisible to native speakers.
While they didn't spend a lot of time on it, I was also taught how to diagram sentences, and it occurs to me that I can't even imagine how one would diagram a "phrasal verb."
I have no recall of learning "phrasal verbs".
It seems just one of the complicated conceptions are imposed upon foreign students.
