get started

Hanako   Fri Sep 15, 2006 8:35 am GMT
Could you help me? I'm a Japanese and teaching English to my students. Today we learned the phrase "Let's get started". One of the students asked me about what kind of grammatical category "started" belongs to? Is it the past participle of the transitive "start"? Or is it the past participle of the intransitive "start"? Or is it just an ordinary adjective? I'm totally puzzled. I'll appreciate any help from you.

Hanako
Robin   Fri Sep 15, 2006 3:32 pm GMT
Is this sort of question really important?

How does it help your students to know the answer?

Wouldn't they be better practising Karoke?

I am a native speaker, and I certainly don't know what the answer is.

Could you frame your answer in English, in such a way that you do not use very technical linguistic expressions, ie jargon?
M56   Fri Sep 15, 2006 3:48 pm GMT
Is "past participle" technical jargon to you?
Hanako   Fri Sep 15, 2006 10:38 pm GMT
I believe we have freedom to try to know everything. Even if you are an English speaker, you have no right to oppress our study on English grammar.

Hanako
Guest   Sat Sep 16, 2006 1:00 am GMT
I think he was saying that since native speakers use and understand it without consciously knowing how the grammar works, foreign learners shouldn't have to consciously understand the grammar either.

Anyway, it is the past participle of the transitive "start". It is not possible for the past participle of an intransitive verb to be used with "get".
Oxford   Sat Sep 16, 2006 2:22 am GMT
Oxford English Dictionary:

<GET>
34-a. With intransitive pa. pple.: To accomplish or complete an action.
(EX) If we could get fled I would remove all my family from this.
(EX) By three I had got sat down to my dinner.
Robin   Sat Sep 16, 2006 2:27 am GMT
<<<<<<<Is "past participle" technical jargon to you?>>>>>>>>>>>>

I know what a noun, verb and adjective are. I have spent some time studying a Web Site that explains English Grammar. But I could not tell you what a 'past participle is'. I am sure that I could do an Internet search if I really wanted to find out.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

<<<<<<<<<<<<<<I believe we have freedom to try to know everything. Even if you are an English speaker, you have no right to oppress our study on English grammar.>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

I am not questioning your freedom to try to know everything. However, you have not answered the questions that I asked of you.

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Is this sort of question really important?

How does it help your students to know the answer?

Wouldn't they be better practising Karoke?

I am a native speaker, and I certainly don't know what the answer is.

Could you frame your answer in English, in such a way that you do not use very technical linguistic expressions, ie jargon?

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

I am not trying to be funny. Could you please explain how it helps to know about: the past participle of the transitive "start"?

Do you think that sort of linguistic analysis helps people to learn English?

Wouldn't it be better just to learn typical English expressions?

Watch TV and Films, listen to people talking, reading; and then, speaking, writing and singing etc.

Bye for now
Guest   Sat Sep 16, 2006 2:45 am GMT
"Oxford English Dictionary:

<GET>
34-a. With intransitive pa. pple.: To accomplish or complete an action.
(EX) If we could get fled I would remove all my family from this.
(EX) By three I had got sat down to my dinner. "

Ah. Maybe that's possible in British English, but those sentences sound strange to me as an American... Maybe some other Americans will have differing opinions, though.
Hanako   Sat Sep 16, 2006 2:56 am GMT
If the "started" is a transitive participle like "get" in "get killed", we should suppose there should be any agent who urge us to start the action : "ourselves" in this case. If it is an intransitive participle like "fled" in "I got fled", we need not to suppose such an agent. This difference may not matter to you but does to me who is learning English through using my brain.
Hanako   Sat Sep 16, 2006 3:00 am GMT
Sorry. I should have written as below.

If the "started" is a transitive participle like "killed" in "get killed", we should suppose there should be any agent who urges us to start the action : "ourselves" in this case. If it is an intransitive participle like "fled" in "I got fled", we need not to suppose such an agent. This difference may not matter to you but does to me who is learning English using the brain.
Robin   Sat Sep 16, 2006 3:32 am GMT
I have tried my best to find a grammatical definition for 'get started', and this is the best that I have been able to come up with.

I think that most native speakers, approach words, looking for meaning. They can also tell you what sounds 'wrong' or 'inappropriate'. Having said that: there are regional variations.

So, you would start with the meaning of the individual words.

Get: Go and do something

Started: starting something

Get Started: Go and get starting on something

"Go and get starting on something" would not sound as good, as 'Get Started' even though the meaning would be the same.

Clever people have put a lot of effort into analysing language. But does an understanding of the analysis help people to learn the language? I am inclined to think, that the analysis is to complicated to be helpful.

That rather than learning rules, it is easier to learn common expressions, and their meaning.

"Get Started" - Pretend to be working right now !!! Make an effort,
Get-Ready-Set-Go etc. Start doing what you are meant to be doing.

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Get started


get: is it a phrasal verb?

get across

etc


Started: verb?

start·ed, start·ing, starts


Many verbs in English are followed by an adverb or a preposition (also called a particle), and these two-part verbs, also called phrasal verbs, are different from verbs with helpers. The particle that follows the verb changes the meaning of the phrasal verb in idiomatic ways:


Some particles can be separated from the verb so that a noun and pronoun can be inserted, and some particles can't be separated from the verb. In addition, some phrases are intransitive, meaning they cannot take a direct object.

Unfortunately, there is usually no indicator whether an idiomatic phrase is separable, inseparable, or intransitive. In most cases the phrases must simply be memorized.

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

1. A phrasal verb is a verb plus a preposition or adverb which creates a meaning different from the original verb.

2. Some phrasal verbs are intransitive. An intransitive verb cannot be followed by an object.

3. Some phrasal verbs are transitive. A transitive verb can be followed by an object.

4. Some transitive phrasal verbs are separable. The object is placed between the verb and the preposition. In this Phrasal Verb Dictionary, separable phrasal verbs are marked by placing a * between the verb and the preposition / adverb.
Hanako   Sat Sep 16, 2006 3:53 am GMT
>Clever people have put a lot of effort into analysing language. But does an understanding of the analysis help people to learn the language? I am inclined to think, that the analysis is to complicated to be helpful.

It depends on who learns what language. English is a truly foreign language to us.

Hanako
Boy   Sat Sep 16, 2006 4:18 am GMT
I would rather know the meaning of the expression and see it in a couple of example sentences and then memorize it and use it actively. I don't give a shit about what kind of grammar is used on this simple expression. If we try to find a grammatical angle literally on any part of a sentence then we are going to have a tough time learning that language.
non-native speaker   Sat Sep 16, 2006 5:32 am GMT
Hanako says: 'English is a truly foreign language to us.'

Right. The native speakers who insist that learning grammar might not help us sound really patronizing. Their "we're native speakers and we don't know a shit about grammar rules - so what?" shows such attitude. Some of you've studied French or German, haven't you? Oh, good for you. Try Japanese, Russian or Hebrew without grammar books, with dictionary only - and we'll look at you then.
M56   Sat Sep 16, 2006 6:43 am GMT
<So, you would start with the meaning of the individual words.

Get: Go and do something

Started: starting something

Get Started: Go and get starting on something

"Go and get starting on something" would not sound as good, as 'Get Started' even though the meaning would be the same.>

I think "get" in "get started means "become".