16

Once I tried to explain what a phrasal verb is by utilizing a similar example in Portuguese. Unfortunately, I couldn't think of any example, which makes me think: are there phrasal verbs in Portuguese?

falsarella
  • 1,482
  • 1
  • 15
  • 23
  • How do you define "phrasal verb"? – Artefacto Mar 16 '16 at 14:34
  • 3
    I think we can consider Cambridge Online Dictionary definition: a ​combination of a verb and an ​adverb or a verb and a ​preposition, or both, in which the ​combination has a ​meaning different from the ​meaning of the words ​considered ​separately. Also, there are some examples on Wikipedia. – falsarella Mar 16 '16 at 14:49
  • 4
    Good question. I guess I had assumed all languages had a number of these. Hadn't realized it could be particular to English. – Dan Getz Mar 16 '16 at 15:48
  • The simpler is no they do not. There are no prepositions that just "hang out" at the end of a verb in Portuguese like they do in English. – Lambie Mar 27 '18 at 15:54
  • falsarella, you chose an answer that is wrong; most of the answers are wrong. It's really too bad. – Lambie Mar 29 '18 at 18:55
  • @Lambie You've brought good points. For now, I've removed the accepted answer. – falsarella Mar 29 '18 at 19:40
  • I hate to toot my own horn but, honestly, I just don't think much understanding of phrasal verbs was demonstrated in the answers here. It's a very specific thing, with a very specific definition...which I gave in my answer with an example of why there are none in Portuguese. – Lambie Mar 29 '18 at 19:55
  • @Lambie I'm sorry if the lack of knowledge have disappointed you. I'm here to learn, otherwise I wouldn't ask anything. I may understand your feelings, and I think you brought valuable input to this topic, but always being friendly with the community is key to success. :) – falsarella Mar 29 '18 at 20:25
  • I didn't mean you. I was merely expressing disappointment at the answers. – Lambie Mar 29 '18 at 20:29
  • The simple test is whether, on response to a question, the ANSWER obligated the particle. The highest ranked answer has estar para, but this fails, because the short asnwer to Estás para X? is just (não) estou and not (não) estou para. Thus even expressions like tenher de/que fail, because the short response to tens de/que trabalhar is just (não) tenho, and it is ungrammatical to include de/que. I believe haver(-)de could/can be used this way, though, so of any verb it'd be the closest candidate. – user0721090601 May 22 '18 at 18:11
  • @guifa Acho que você acertou. Parabéns. Não existe nehuma estrutura em português na qual uma preposição se cola ao verbo para criar um só sentido. Ponto final. Fiquei um pouco irritada de ver que esta pergunta foi aberta de novo.:) – Lambie May 22 '18 at 18:40
  • @user0721090601 tenher de is not Portuguese. Portuguese is: ter que and Spanish is: tener que. – Lambie Feb 15 '24 at 15:13

8 Answers8

10

After some research, I've found an example at Wikipedia:

O fenômeno dos "phrasal verbs" também ocorre na língua portuguesa. Contudo, não é muito comum. É mais encontrado no português coloquial falado no Brasil e não deve ser utilizado em contextos formais.

Exemplos:

"Não quero mais saber de você! Cai fora!" (cair fora = sair, retirar-se);

"Depois de ter sido xingada, ela partiu para cima dele com uma faca." (partir para cima = atacar algo ou alguém).

"Cai fora" is analogous to "Get out", and both seems to be great examples of phrasal verbs.

Edit:

This is really interesting! All Portuguese examples given by the answers here are slangs or informal/casual, being mostly used in spoken language. And it also seems that the use of English phrasal verbs has a slight difference in formality when compared to its one-word counterparts, which indeed makes much sense.

falsarella
  • 1,482
  • 1
  • 15
  • 23
  • Your link does not seem to support your claim of "slangs or informal/casual": I presume that if it is (...) a difference in formality, it is because Latin and French borrowings to English often are seen as more formal than the equivalent native (i.e. Old English) constructions. – ANeves Mar 17 '16 at 10:31
  • @ANeves Note Anne W Zahra's answer: [...] Yes, they are older, and they are informal. We use phrasal verbs a lot in spoken English [...] and it's easy to invent a new phrasal verb for a new idea. I have a friend (also a teacher) who complains she is "peopled out" by the end of the school day. She means that after school she is tired of talking to people and doesn't like to talk. You will not find people out in a dictionary, but it's easy to understand the idea because there are similar phrasal verbs. – falsarella Mar 17 '16 at 13:44
  • @ANeves Also, you have omitted an important part of the quotation, when he mentions Heidi Olson's answer: Well, I don't know why we do it, but what I've read is that phrasal verbs are more informal/casual than their one-word counterparts. So to my American ear anyways "postpone" sounds stuffy while "put off" sounds more natural. A lot of languages have different verb forms to show different levels of formality. It seems that this is sort of English's way of doing that.. Anyway, I understand your point, and I'll update my answer to better address this issue. – falsarella Mar 17 '16 at 14:10
  • 1
    O Oxford Learner's Dictionaries classifica eat out como phrasal verb. É exatamente equivalente a comer fora, jantar fora, almoçar fora. – Jacinto Mar 17 '16 at 15:48
  • 1
    @Jacinto I think that's very dubious. Oxford Dictionaries itself doesn't. – Artefacto Mar 17 '16 at 17:17
  • 1
    @Artefacto Quer-me parecer que o Oxford Dictionaries apresenta os phrasal verbs sem os classificar como tal. – Jacinto Mar 17 '16 at 17:36
  • 2
    @Jacinto Não é verdade. Vê em baixo. – Artefacto Mar 17 '16 at 18:20
  • 1
    @Artefacto Já vi, tens razão. Eat out está então na gray area que tu referes na tua resposta: uns classificam-no como phrasal verb, outros não. – Jacinto Mar 17 '16 at 18:30
  • 1
    In terms of what I think of with phrasal verbs "partir para cima" =~ "went for the head" is a perfect example. I'm now wondering where we could find more like this? – roberto tomás Mar 18 '16 at 12:48
  • "Cair fora" is an idiom that means (something like) "get out", or perhaps more exactly, "get the fuck out". But I am not sure it is analogous to a phrasal verb (it certainly isn't considered as such by native grammaticians; we don't talk of "verbos frasais" or "vebos compostos" in such a context). – Luís Henrique Jan 10 '18 at 23:47
  • 1
    Frankly, I think that to say cair fora is a "phrasal verb" is a very gross error. fora is not a preposition. E se cair fora fosse "phrasal verb", cair duro também seria. Fora é advérbio, gente. French, Portuguese and Spanish do not have "phrasal verbs": a unique combination of a verb and preposition that confers meaning to the pair. – Lambie Mar 27 '18 at 16:00
  • 1
    I going to have to go to that Wikipedia article and revise it. – Lambie Mar 29 '18 at 12:39
  • @Lambie Desculpe minha ignorância, mas duro não seria um adjetivo, ao passo que fora é um advérbio? Outra coisa que me intriga é o fato de dizer que cair fora não é um "verbo frasal" pois fora não é uma preposição, sendo que em sua resposta, você comenta que em um "verbo frasal" às vezes pode ter um advérbio ao invés da preposição, que seria o caso de fora. Não parece uma contradição? – falsarella Mar 29 '18 at 20:05
  • Não, na expressão cair duro, a palavra duro funciona como advérbio porque responde à pregunta: Como caiu? E cair fora também. Aonde caiu?" Cair fora implica: daqui, e cair duro implica no chão. Em inglês, o phrasal verbo não implica nada: He went out last night. Ele saiu ontém a noite. – Lambie Mar 30 '18 at 14:06
  • @jacinto eat out é verbo frasal, mas não quando significa comer fora (em tal caso, significado literalmente comer, sendo fora onde se come. Eat out como verbo frasal tem conotação sexual (sexo oral feito à mulher) – user0721090601 May 23 '18 at 20:19
  • @guifa, então o dicionário que eu linkei (Oxford Learner's) enganou-se: ele classifica eat out como phrasal verb precisamente na aceção 'comer fora'. – Jacinto May 23 '18 at 20:22
9

English phrasal verbs are combinations of verbs and prepositions where the meaning of the expressions as a whole cannot be completely understood just from the meaning of the individual parts. Syntactically, there are only minor differences between phrasal verbs and actual combinations of verbs and prepositions, it's more of a semantic concept, with a lot of gray area between the two fields (see for instance Dixon, The grammar of English phrasal verbs, 1982 [subscription required]).

So if the question is whether there are verbs that, combined with a preposition, take a different meaning, the answer is yes. Just look at special entries in dictionaries under a verb. For instance, with estar (Aulete):

Estar para 1 Estar prestes a, na iminência de: Ela está para ter neném por estes dias.

However, the preposition cannot stand alone, it always introduces a prepositional phrase. This would be analogous to prepositional phrasal verbs, as Wikipedia puts it (citing The Collins Cobuild English Grammar). But nothing like the particle phrasal verbs or particle-prepositional phrasal verbs, at least admitting that the particle (which then has an adverbial role) has to function also as a preposition. If we relax this requirement, then we can think of expressions such as dar-se bem (com qualquer coisa). If you deem do well (for oneself) a phrasal verb, this would probably also qualify as such.

There are also prefixes that can be added to verbs that can also work as prepositions, like sob (sobpor). However, 1) this would not analogous to phrasal verbs, more like to verbs such as understand (under + stand), 2) at least with sobpor the meaning can be deduced from the parts and 3) the are very few prefixes that also have a preposition counterpart, unlike say Dutch, where most (simple) prepositions can also function as a prefix for a separable verb (except a few like via and tijdens and some others that take a different form like met / mee).

ANeves
  • 7,117
  • 6
  • 29
  • 54
Artefacto
  • 16,332
  • 1
  • 27
  • 62
  • I'm not sure this is a good example, I think that She's just about to have a baby doesn't actually sound like a phrasal verb example. I specially like your last paragraph examples, but I kind of also agree those aren't entirely analogous. Thanks for the input! – falsarella Mar 16 '16 at 15:27
  • 1
    @falsarella I didn't write She's just about to have a baby, I wrote Ela está para ter neném por estes dias. Your question was whether phrasal verbs existed in Portuguese, not whether phrasal verbs exist in Portugese whose translation in English (of which there are several anyway) also has a phrasal verb. – Artefacto Mar 16 '16 at 15:35
  • Sorry, I meant that Ela está para ter neném por estes dias doesn't seem to be a phrasal verb as we can notice in She's just about to have a baby. Furthermore, if you contextualize that I was trying to explain what a phrasal verb is, a translatable example would be of better fit. Actually, I couldn't agree more that it shouldn't be a required condition: if it really doesn't exist in portuguese, there wouldn't be a translatable way of explaining it. – falsarella Mar 16 '16 at 15:41
  • 1
    @falsarella how could you tell from a translation if it's phrasal in another language? I don't understand what you're saying. But I also find it hard to be certain if something's a phrasal verb when its verb is something like estar, ser, ficar. – Dan Getz Mar 16 '16 at 15:46
  • @DanGetz Sorry, again, I meant that both phrases doesn't seem to use phrasal verbs, not that one isn't because of another. I agree, I also find it hard to identify it, specially when using estar. – falsarella Mar 16 '16 at 16:01
  • I think Dar-se bem is an awesome example! Nice edit regarding different types of phrasal verbs, by the way! And as I said on another answer, it is interesting the fact of being mostly present in slangs (as we can notice in other answers). Maybe phrasal verbs aren't part of regular Portuguese itself, but they are actually still being introduced to Portuguese by spoken language. – falsarella Mar 16 '16 at 16:17
  • This answer seems to answer «maybe yes», but in my opinion it lacks good examples. «Estar para» can be substituted with «estar prestes a», «estar quase a», etc - if it was phrasal, changing the preposition but maintaining the verb would change the meaning, and it does not seem to. I feel the same with «dar-se bem», but cannot find a way to write a solid argument for that one being a weak example. – ANeves Mar 17 '16 at 10:28
  • Or maybe I just don't get English phrasal verbs, that could also be it. They seem to be the German trennbare Verben, but it might just be a concidence. – ANeves Mar 17 '16 at 10:35
  • 1
    @ANeves Well if you don't like «estar para», you can think of «dar(-lhe) de/para» (ex. from Aulete: «Ultimamente ele deu de roer as unhas.»). The problem is that phrasal verbs are more of a semantic concept. They don't have syntactic properties as marked as separable verbs in Dutch (and German). Under a purely semantic analysis, it is true that in Portuguese (and I guess most languages) some verbs change meaning when combined with some prepositions or adverbs. – Artefacto Mar 17 '16 at 10:57
  • @ANeves BTW it's not the case that it's necessary that «changing the preposition but maintaining the verb [changes] the meaning», for instance «give in» and «give up» can both mean «admit defeat» (to be sure, there are small differences, but there are also small differences between «estar para», «estar prestes a» and «estar quase a»). And I'm sure that with enough effort better synonyms could be found. – Artefacto Mar 17 '16 at 11:21
  • I like that argument. Dar is a really complex verb though, with too many nuances of meaning. «Dar-lhe para» could maybe be a metaphorical usage of definition 39 in Priberam? – ANeves Mar 17 '16 at 12:19
  • 1
    @ANeves Sure, but how do you think phrasal verbs or any fixed expression come to being in the first place? There's a relationship with the meaning of the constituent parts that gets thinner as time goes by. Plus, that still doesn't explain the «dar de» in the example. – Artefacto Mar 17 '16 at 14:31
  • dar de has to be followed by a noun, a phrasal verb does not. "The boys took off at 4 o'clock and no one has seen them since." – Lambie Mar 27 '18 at 16:09
  • Look for // look after // turn off // pick up // put on // check out //... // have to be followed by a noun... – Cem Argumentos Blogspot Apr 04 '18 at 09:43
  • se eu pensar em verbos como take out, que significa "descolar", ou seja, bem distante do verbo take, parece-me que em PT não há propriamente phrasal verbs. Mas a citação que dás logo no início parece-me excelente, é mais uma questão semântica do que propriamente sintática. – João Pimentel Ferreira Apr 14 '18 at 10:43
4

Phrasal verbs in English are one verb plus one preposition (sometimes an adverb) that together form a single unit of meaning:

  • go out
  • come back
  • sit up
  • find out

In Portuguese some verbs are followed by a preposition but the combination of the preposition and the verb on their own have no meaning.

Ele foi de pirata. IR DE is not a single meaning. There has to be something after it: de pirata. What has meaning is: ir + de + pirata.

If there were phrasal verbs in Portuguese, you could say (and of course you can't) estar para ter neném as: Ela está para essa semana? estar para + VERB + noun. And estar + para without anything else is gibberish in Portuguese.

Phrasal verbs form single units of meaning: get there = to arrive get up=rise or arise find out=discover

Etc.

Lambie
  • 2,682
  • 10
  • 16
  • Simple as that. +1 – Centaurus Mar 29 '18 at 16:57
  • @Centaurus Indeed, it is. – Lambie Mar 29 '18 at 17:01
  • De facto IR + DE ou ESTAR + PARA não me parecem phrasal verbs, porque as preposições não mudam de facto os sentidos originais dos verbos. Contudo, desafio-vos a ver outros exemplos mais interessantes - ver minha intervenção.... – Cem Argumentos Blogspot Mar 31 '18 at 10:25
  • @CemArgumentosBlogspot Acho que você ainda não pegou a minha ideia. Eu estou *comparando* a estrutura do phrasal verb em inglés e mostrando porque isto é impossível em português. Não importa qual preposição se coloca em português e que mude o sentido, não existe phrasal verbs, ou seja: uma unidade léxica constituída por um verbo e uma preposição, sem nada mais. – Lambie Mar 31 '18 at 22:15
  • Eu nunca disse que ir + de é um phrasal verb. Não se pode dizer em português: Você foi de? Sem nada mais. É meramente uma demonstração da lógica: um verbo + uma preposição sem outro elemento. Isso não existe em português. Não faz parte da estructura do português. – Lambie Mar 31 '18 at 22:25
  • De facto, existem alguns phrasal verbs que, em inglês, dispensam complemento (o que não acontece em português). Por exemplo: "give up". Contudo, muitos outros exigem complemento, por exemplo: "give up on (somebody)" ou "agree with (something)" - e não deixam de ser phrasal verbs. É uma questão de olhar para a lista de phrasal verbs (em inglês) para verificar que uma boa parte exige complemento e não é uma unidade léxica que possa estar sozinha. Por isso não concordo quando diz que os phrasal verbs são, em regra, uma unidade semântica sem necessidade de complemento.Para alguns sim, outros não. – Cem Argumentos Blogspot Apr 01 '18 at 20:02
  • @CemArgumentosBlogspot "De facto, existem alguns phrasal verbs que, em inglês, dispensam complemento". Não senhor, *todos os phrasal verbs em inglês podem ser usado sem complemento porque formam uma unidade léxica sem mais nada* "agree with someone" is not a phrasal verb. Give up, is. And I'm giving up right now. Eu não vou olhar nenhuma lista, sou nativa falente de inglês por isso me autoriso a dar este palpite. E também sou tradutora e tenho sido professora de inglês no passado. – Lambie Apr 01 '18 at 20:14
  • 1
    Ok. É essa a nossa discordância. Como não é matéria de opinião, termina aqui a discussão ;-) Mas foi um prazer. Já agora, devo dizer que o dicionário de inglês da Cambridge também não concorda consigo: https://dictionary.cambridge.org/pt/dicionario/ingles/give-up-on-sb-sth?q=give+up+on OU https://dictionary.cambridge.org/pt/dicionario/ingles/agree-with-sth?q=agree+with – Cem Argumentos Blogspot Apr 02 '18 at 10:25
  • I have written to them to point out the mistake with "agree with". Any phrasal verb in the English language can be used on its own without an object. Every single one of them. You can't say: I agree with without an object. Therefore, the verb agree TAKES with but it not a phrasal verb. – Lambie Apr 02 '18 at 14:30
  • I think you ignored my references. Please check them. – Cem Argumentos Blogspot Apr 02 '18 at 15:19
  • No, I wrote them: They are conflating: a verb that takes a preposition to mean something (which is the same in Portuguese) and *a verb plus a preposition as a single lexical unit*. Apparently, they have made the editorial decision to do that, which is not helpful to English language learners. That is because for them (but not for others), both constitute a "phrase". That is not how this is traditionally understood in TOEFL contexts. – Lambie Apr 02 '18 at 15:31
  • There is a huge difference between a verb that takes a preposition to mean something (Cambridge calls the latter: prepositional verbs) and a verb + a preposition that forms a single lexical unit. Their definitions agree with what I have said: dictionary.cambridge.org/grammar/british-grammar/about-verbs/verbs-multi-word-verbs – Lambie Apr 02 '18 at 15:38
1

Of course there are phrasal verbs in Portuguese.

Some examples (not slang nor informal):

fazer de: means to pretend to be (someone or something) - playing a role
deixar de: means to stop (doing something)
passar por: means to pretend to be (someone)
correr com: means to expel (someone)
dar com: means to find
(não) dar por: means (not) to notice

and so on...

PS - A phrasal verb combines a verb with a preposition (or adverb or both) whose meaning is different from the meanings of the individual words. "Fazer" means to do; "deixar" means to let; "passar" means to pass; "correr" means to run and "dar" means to give. Clearly, their meaning changes when the preposition is added.

Cem Argumentos Blogspot
  • 62
  • 4
  • 1
    No, those are not phrasal verbs. – Lambie Mar 27 '18 at 16:04
  • Yes, they are. A phrasal verb combines a verb with a preposition (or adverb or both) whose meaning is different from the combined meanings of the individual words. "Fazer" means to do; "deixar" means to let; "passar" means to pass; "correr" means to run and "dar" means to give. Clearly their meaning changes when the preposition is added. – Cem Argumentos Blogspot Mar 30 '18 at 10:32
  • Infelizmente, não é assim. Claro que a preposição seguido de um verbo ou substantivo muda o sentido, só que o verbo ou substantivo precisa estar não oração. No phrasal verb, o verbo + preposição forma uma unidade semântica sem necessidade de outro elemento. Isso em português é simplesemente impossível. – Lambie Mar 30 '18 at 13:52
  • Não entendo bem o que diz. Se diz que um phrasal verb, por regra, forma uma unidade semântica sem necessidade de complemento, isso, como sabe, não é verdade. Poderia dar dezenas de exemplos. Dou um: "to agree with (something)" é um phrasal verb, e obviamento implica a existência de complemento. Por isso, podia ser mais explícita e dar exemplos? Não consegui perceber a exclusividade que refere. – Cem Argumentos Blogspot Mar 30 '18 at 22:19
  • Note-se que, de facto, existem alguns phrasal verbs que, em inglês, dispensam complemento (o que não acontece em português). Por exemplo: "give up". Contudo, muitos outros exigem complemento, por exemplo: "give up on (somebody)" ou "agree with (something)" - e não deixam de ser phrasal verbs. É uma questão de olhar para a lista de phrasal verbs. – Cem Argumentos Blogspot Mar 30 '18 at 22:45
  • Look, I hate to tell you this once again but you have not understood what a phrasal verb is in English: It is a single lexical unit made up of two words: a verb plus a preposition and nothing else. Give up on something=phrasal verb=give up, "agree with" is not a phrasal verb. The verb agree takes the preposition for. That's different. It does not form a single lexical unit. You have to have an object: agree with someone or something. – Lambie Mar 31 '18 at 22:21
  • Sorry, but I'm afraid you are totally wrong. You should check this out: ttps://dictionary.cambridge.org/pt/dicionario/ingles/agree-with-sth?q=agree+with – Cem Argumentos Blogspot Apr 02 '18 at 10:45
  • I do not agree with you. //To agree with someone// is merely that the verb agree *takes* the preposition with. If it were a phrasal verb, I could say: "I do not agree with." without a pronoun. You can't say that, ergo, it is not a phrasal verb. That dictionary has a mistake. – Lambie Apr 02 '18 at 14:24
0

Although I can't give you any references, I dare say there aren't any phrasal verbs in Portuguese. That has been widely cited as one of the several differences between English and Portuguese. We do have, however, slang phrases that might sound like a phrasal verb: e.g. "entrar bem", where "entrar" means "enter", "go in", and "bem" means "well". Together, they mean "entrou pelo cano", "não se deu bem"

"Ele tentou enganar o professor mas no final entrou bem".

Centaurus
  • 24,305
  • 16
  • 73
  • 159
  • Could you explain why slang phrases like your example would not be phrasal verbs? The difference is not clear to me. Is there a grammatical difference, or is there some sense in which entrar bem is the sum of its parts instead of a new meaning? – Dan Getz Mar 16 '16 at 16:03
  • I have never heard of "entrar bem", but I do think you have a good example! – falsarella Mar 16 '16 at 16:08
  • And it is interesting the fact of being a slang, I have also found another slang examples. Maybe phrasal verbs aren't part of regular Portuguese itself, but they are actually still being introduced to Portuguese by spoken language? – falsarella Mar 16 '16 at 16:14
  • Credo, que alivio, ouvir esta resposta! :) Entrar bem is a verb + an adverb, not a verb + a preposition. Why would you need a reference? If phrasal verbs existed in the same way in Romance languages, there would be plenty of references....there is a reason there are "no references". It's simple. There are no phrasal verbs in Portuguese. [falsarella, slang nunca leva s and we say: a slang word, or slang, but not a slang]. – Lambie Mar 27 '18 at 16:13
  • Me disculpa mas pensando bem nesse assunto e relendo as respostas mias uma vez, fiquei impressionada pela falta de conhecimento gramatical dos....jovens? – Lambie Mar 29 '18 at 12:44
  • @Lambie não seria "desculpa"? – falsarella Mar 29 '18 at 20:08
  • @falsarella Sim, é um erro de digitação. Quando escrevo rápido, acontece muito. – Lambie Mar 29 '18 at 20:30
0

TL:DR; yeah, I don't believe anymore there are phrasal verbs in Portuguese thanks to the fair point made by our fellow enthusiast in the comments below. As a layman, like I stated in comments, I guess some expressions we use gets pretty close to the idea of phrasal verbs in my opinion, but in the end they're still just expressions..

---x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-xx-x-

I was about to say no to your question. Then I thought about transitive and intransitive verbs, which is a very important concept taught throughout our language courses here in Brazil. So I guess, if you consider it that way, yeah, we have phrasal verbs. Some verbs change entirely their meaning by preposition usage (ir ao encontro = to meet up with, ir de encontro = to disagree, from the top of my head is what I can quote, but there are lists, very long lists, riddle with examples, that I had to memorize for some reason during grade school).

I disagree with some of the examples used in some of the replies though. All the examples cited above seem to me more like idioms not quite slangs and definitely not what I understand as phrasal verb (but then again, my English classes are way behind me, and I haven't had to review grammar that specific recently), if my English knowledge doesn't fail me. Mainly because many of these expressions aren't actually informal, nor restricted to a region, age, social group etc.

icarosfar
  • 11
  • 4
  • Slang is never plural. Transitive and intransitive verbs in Portugues have no relation to phrasal verbs in English. Portuguese does not have phrasal verbs: one verb + a preposition that forms a single semantic meaning. Ir de encontro is not a phrasal verb. Ir de is a verb plus preposition that does not form a single lexical unit: You can't say: Você foi de ontém? As you can in English: Did you go out yesterday? ir de has no meaning. – Lambie Mar 29 '18 at 01:22
  • I mean, maybe? Like I said, I just believe, I don't have any literature yet to correct or stand by myself. Not really sure if I ever heard that combination "você foi de ontem?" and I'm speaking from a layman's perspective. Not sure what you meant about "slang never being plural". You meant as in several meanings? Or the English word doesn't have a plural form? I understand that "ir de" may be used to other expressions, that's why I kept "encontro" in both examples, but yeah, in hindsight it's not an ideal portrayal. – icarosfar Mar 29 '18 at 03:38
  • Outra vez, vou me disculpar. Claro que "Você foi de ontém" não existe. Isso é exatamente o que eu estou dizendo. O que existe é: ir de x. O dito phrasal verbo se compõe de uma verbo mais uma preposição sem acresento; Isso não existe em português. **Se existisse, seria possível dizer: "ir de" sem subtantivo. Eis a prova. [Slang é um substantivo não-contável ou adjetivo. Slang is hard to learn. Slang words. Not "a slang"] – Lambie Mar 29 '18 at 13:11
  • ahhh agora saquei tudo! E obrigado, não sabia disso do slang ser não contável, deveria ter imaginado! – icarosfar Mar 29 '18 at 16:14
  • Erro: me desculpar. – Lambie Mar 29 '18 at 20:30
  • @Lambie Gostaria que suportasse com referências credíveis o que diz. Todas as gramáticas que conheço dizem que há phrasal verbs transitivos. – Cem Argumentos Blogspot Apr 02 '18 at 11:07
  • Eu me pregunto, se algo não existe numa língua, porque existeria uma refêrencia para o assunto? Seria equivalente de dizer: existe futuro do subjuntivo em inglês? Se existisse phrasal verbs em português porque não existe um termo consagrado para descreve-los?? Que sejam transitivos ou não, não tem nada a ver com a definiçao do que é. – Lambie Apr 02 '18 at 14:19
  • Desculpe: qualquer gramática classifica os phrasal verbs como intransitivos ou transitivos, sendo que os últimos podem ser separáveis ou inseparáveis (relativamente ao objeto). Por isso acho estranho que alguém venha afirmar (com tanta certeza) que não existem phrasal verbs transitivos - a menos que tenha um conhecimento que seria bom partilhar (com referências, claro) – Cem Argumentos Blogspot Apr 02 '18 at 15:17
-1

I believe these are the most similar to phrasal verbs in Portuguese;

  • Dar em cima de; to flert sb.
  • Pular fora; escape from a bad or weird situation
  • Sair pra lá; excuse me
  • Sair fora; Go away
  • Cai dentro; to face, to confront sb.
  • Cair fora; to leave a place
  • Levar fora; to be rejected by someone
  • Ficar de (bem/mal); to reconcile/ to be at odds to so.
  • Dar bem/mal; to suffer the consequences or to do badly or to be in trouble or even to get your fingers burnt
  • Ficar fora; to be without with something eg.: ficar fora de si/to get out of control or to get crazy
  • Ficar fora de forma; to be out of shape.

These are some examples of the similar in Portuguese, not classified grammatically as phrasal verbs are in English, though.

gmauch
  • 3,816
  • 6
  • 32
  • 55
Wello
  • 1
  • 1
  • "Sair pra lá" does not mean "excuse me". "Sai pra lá" means "get out of my way". So, similar meaning but to be used in a totally different situation – bfavaretto Mar 29 '18 at 16:59
  • There is zero similarity of phrasal verbs in English and verbs that take a preposition in Portuguese. There are so many misleading ideas in the answers about phrasal verbs. All your examples have zero do with phrasal verbs. Todos os exemplos que você colocou são verbos + advérbios. – Lambie Mar 29 '18 at 18:53
  • "dar em cima de" sounds more like "to make repeated and sexually-motivated advances on". "Pular fora" does not mean "escape" but "get out of" or "get away from". "Sai pra lá!" means "get away". "ficar fora de si" = "lose one's mind". – Centaurus Mar 29 '18 at 23:58
  • It doesn't matter what they mean, they are not phrasal verbs. And: you can't stuff verbs in Portuguese and then say they are not classified as phrasal verbs in English. That's nuts. – Lambie Mar 31 '18 at 22:27
-1

Yes, there are. As a native speaker I can think of few like:

  • cair dentro (to fall in) – to enroll in something.

  • dar em cima (to give over) – to hit on someone, to flirt.

tchrist
  • 3,299
  • 2
  • 21
  • 40
VITOR OAK
  • 1