{{Short description|Syntactical occurrence}} '''Preposition stranding''' or '''p-stranding''' is the syntactic construction in which a so-called ''stranded'', ''hanging'', or ''dangling'' preposition occurs somewhere other than immediately before its corresponding object; for example, at the end of a sentence. The term ''preposition stranding'' was coined in 1964, predated by '''stranded preposition''' in 1949.<ref>{{cite web|url=https://books.google.com/ngrams/graph?content=preposition+stranding&year_start=1900&year_end=2019&corpus=26&smoothing=3&direct_url=t1%3B%2Cpreposition%20stranding%3B%2Cc0#t1%3B%2Cpreposition%20stranding%3B%2Cc1 |title=preposition stranding|access-date=2022-05-15}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=https://books.google.com/ngrams/graph?content=preposition+stranding&year_start=1900&year_end=2019&corpus=26&smoothing=3&direct_url=t1%3B%2Cpreposition%20stranding%3B%2Cc0 |title=stranded preposition |access-date=2022-05-15}}</ref> Linguists had previously identified such a construction as a '''sentence-terminal preposition'''<ref name="Webster" /> or as a '''preposition at the end'''.<ref name="Fowler" />

Preposition stranding is found in English and other Germanic languages,<ref>{{cite book |last1= Huddleston |first1=Rodney |author-link= Rodney Huddleston |last2=Pullum |first2=Geoffrey K. |author2-link=Geoffrey Pullum |title= A Student's Introduction to English Grammar |place=Cambridge |publisher= Cambridge UP |year=2005 |isbn=0-521-61288-8}} pages 137–38.</ref><ref>{{cite book |last=Roberts |first=Ian G. |author-link= Ian Roberts (linguist) |title= Diachronic Syntax |publisher= Oxford UP |year=2007 |location= Oxford |isbn=978-0-19-925398-2}} page 238.</ref><ref>{{Cite journal |last1=Maling |first1=Joan |last2=Zaenen |first2=Annie |author2-link= Annie Zaenen |year=1985 |title= Preposition-Stranding and Passive |journal= Nordic Journal of Linguistics |volume=8 |issue=2 |pages= 197–209 |doi= 10.1017/S0332586500001335 |s2cid=145476590 }} page 197.</ref><ref>{{Cite Q | Q109265906 }}</ref> as well as in Vata and Gbadi (languages in the Niger–Congo family), and certain dialects of French spoken in North America.{{citation needed|date=April 2021}}

P-stranding occurs in various syntactic contexts, including passive voice,<ref>{{Cite journal|last=Rohdenburg|first=G|date=2017|title=Formal asymmetries between active and passive clauses in Modern English: The avoidance of preposition stranding with verbs featuring omissible prepositions|url=https://doi.org/10.1515/ang-2017-0068|journal=Anglia|volume=135|issue=4|pages=700–744|doi=10.1515/ang-2017-0068|s2cid=165895615|url-access=subscription}}</ref> ''wh-''movement,<ref name=":1" /><ref name=":0">{{Cite journal|last1=Alaowffi|first1=Nouf Yousef|last2=Alharbi|first2=Bader Yousef|date=2021-06-24|title=Preposition stranding under sluicing: Evidence from Hijazi Arabic|url=https://www.jlls.org/index.php/jlls/article/view/2404|journal=Journal of Language and Linguistic Studies|language=en|volume=17|issue=2|pages=941–957|doi=10.52462/jlls.65|s2cid=237819725|issn=1305-578X|doi-access=free}}</ref> and sluicing.<ref name=":1" /><ref name=":0" />

== ''Wh-''movement and P-stranding == ''Wh-''movement—which involves ''wh-''words like ''who'', ''what'', ''when'', ''where'', ''why'' and ''how''—is a syntactic dependency between a sentence-initial ''wh-''word and the gap that it is associated with. ''Wh-''movement can lead to P-stranding if the object of the preposition is moved to sentence-initial position, and the preposition is left behind.&nbsp;P-stranding from ''wh-''movement is observed in English and Scandinavian languages. The more common alternative is called ''pied piping'', a rule that prohibits separating a preposition from its object, for instances in Serbo-Croatian and Arabic languages. English and Dutch use ''both'' rules, providing the option of two constructions in these situations.

=== Preposition stranding allowed under ''wh-''movement ===

==== In English ==== An open interrogative often takes the form of a ''wh''- question (beginning with a word like ''what'' or ''who'').

P-stranding in English allows the separation of the preposition from its object, while pied piping allows carrying the preposition along with the ''wh-'' object.<ref name=":0" /> From the examples below, we can see the two options. *'''Which''' town did you come '''from'''?<ref name=":0" /> ** '''From which''' town did you come? *thumb|English allows prepositional stranding under regular wh-movement.'''What''' are you talking '''about'''?{{efn|name=Generative grammar|In transformational approaches to syntax, it is commonly assumed that the movement of a constituent out of a phrase leaves a silent trace, in this case following the preposition: '''What'''<sub>i</sub> are you talking '''about''' ___<sub>i</sub>?<br/> This bed looks as if '''it''' <sub>i</sub> has been slept '''in''' ___<sub>i</sub>.<br/> This is '''the book'''<sub>i</sub> '''that'''<sub>i</sub> I told you '''about''' ___<sub>i</sub>. }} ** '''About what''' are you talking?

==== In Danish ==== P-stranding in Danish is banned only if the ''wh-''word is referring to nominative cases.<ref>{{cite book|last=Law|first=Paul|date=2006|chapter=Chapter 51: Prepositional Stranding|chapter-url=https://doi.org/10.1002/9780470996591.ch51|title=The Blackwell Companion to Syntax|volume=1|pages=632–685|doi=10.1002/9780470996591.ch51}}</ref> "Peter has spoken with <whom>", the ''wh-''word <whom> is the accusative case. Therefore, p-stranding is allowed.

{{interlinear|indent=3 | '''Hvem''' har Peter snakket '''med'''?|c1= <ref name=":0" /> | '''whom''' has Peter speak.{{gcl|PP|past participle}} '''with''' |'Whom has Peter spoken with?'|lang=da}}

==== In Dutch ==== *Directional constructions {{interlinear|indent=3 | '''Welk''' '''bos'''<sub>i</sub> liep hij ___<sub>i</sub> '''in'''? | '''which''' '''forest'''<sub>i</sub> walked he ___<sub>i</sub> '''into'''? |'What forest did he walk into?'|lang=nl}}

* ''R''-pronouns {{interlinear|indent=3 | '''Waar''' praatten wij '''over'''? | '''where''' talked we '''about'''? | 'What did we talk about?'|lang=nl}}

==== In French ==== * Standard French requires **{{Lang|fr|'''Pour qui''' est-ce que tu as fait le gâteau?}} **'''For whom''' did you bake the cake? * Some dialects, such as Prince Edward Island French, permit<ref>{{Cite book |last=King |first=Ruth |url=https://www.jbe-platform.com/content/books/9789027299512 |title=The Lexical Basis of Grammatical Borrowing: A Prince Edward Island French case study |series=Current Issues in Linguistic Theory |date=2000-12-21 |volume=209 |publisher=John Benjamins |isbn=978-90-272-9951-2 |pages=139 |language=en |doi=10.1075/cilt.209}}</ref> {{Interlinear|indent=3|Qui ce-que t’as fait le gâteau pour?|who that 2SG.have made the cake for|'Who did you make the cake for?'|lang=fr}}

=== Preposition stranding disallowed under wh-movement === ==== In Greek ==== ''Wh-''movement in Greek states that the extracted PP must be in Spec-CP,<ref>{{Cite journal|last=Michelioudakis, Sitaridou|first=Dimitris, Ioanna|date=2016|title=Recasting the typology of multiple wh-fronting: Evidence from Pontic Greek|journal=Glossa|volume=1|pages=1–33|doi=10.5334/gjgl.72|s2cid=55766150 |doi-access=free}}</ref> which means the PP ({{Lang|el-latn|me}}) needs to move with the ''wh-''word ({{Lang|el-latn|Pjon}}). It can thus be seen that Greek allows pied piping in wh-movement but not prepositional stranding.

{{interlinear|indent=3 | *'''Pjon''' milise '''me'''?|c1= <ref name=":1" /> | '''who''' she.speak.PAST '''with''' | 'Who did she speak with?'|lang=el}}

==== In Spanish ==== Pied-piping is the only grammatical option in Spanish to construct oblique relative clauses.<ref>{{Cite journal|last=PERPIÑÁN|first=SILVIA|date=2014|title=L2 Grammar and L2 Processing in the Acquisition of Spanish Prepositional Relative Clauses|url=https://doi.org/10.1017/S1366728914000583|journal=Bilingualism: Language and Cognition|volume=18|issue=4|pages=577–596|doi=10.1017/S1366728914000583|s2cid=145188813|url-access=subscription}}</ref> Since pied-piping is the opposite of p-stranding, p-stranding in Spanish is not possible (* indicates ungrammaticality).

{{interlinear|indent=3 | *'''Qué''' chica ha hablado Peter '''con'''?|c1= <ref name=":1" /> | '''which''' girl.SG has talk.{{gcl|PP|past participle}} Peter '''with''' | 'Who has Peter talked with?'|lang=es}}

==== In Arabic ==== ===== Emirati Arabic (EA) ===== P-stranding in EA is possible only by using which-NPs that strand prepositions and follow them with IP-deletion.

{{interlinear|indent=3 | '''ʔaj''' Mʊkaan laag-et John '''fi'''?|c1= <ref name=":0" /> | '''which''' place met-2MS John '''at''' | 'Which place did you meet John at?'|lang=afb-latn}}

The preposition ({{Lang|afb-latn|fi}}) should be moved together with the ''wh-''word ({{Lang|afb-latn|ʔaj}}) to make this sentence grammatical.<ref name=":0" />

It should be:

{{interlinear|indent=3 | '''f-ʔaj''' Mʊkaan laag-et John?|c1= <ref name=":0" /> | '''at-which''' place met-2MS John | 'At which place did you meet John at?|lang=afb-latn}}

===== Libyan Arabic (LA) ===== P-stranding in wh-movement sentences is normally banned in LA. However, a recent study found that a preposition seems to be stranded in a resumptive ''wh-''question.<ref>Algryani, A. (2012). ''He Syntax of Ellipsis in Libyan Arabic: A generative analysis of sluicing, Vp ellipsis, stripping and negative contrast'' (dissertation).</ref>

{{interlinear|indent=3 | '''man''' Ali tekəllem '''mʕa'''?|c1= <ref name=":0" /> | '''who''' Ali talked.3MS '''with''' |'Who did Ali talk with?'|lang=ayl-latn}}

== Sluicing and p-stranding == Sluicing is a specific type of ellipsis that involves ''wh-''phrases. In sluicing, the ''wh-''phrase is stranded while the sentential portion of the constituent question is deleted. The preposition is stranded inside the constituent questions before sluicing. Some languages allow prepositional stranding under sluicing, while other languages ban it.<ref name=":1">{{Cite journal|last1=Griffiths|first1=James|last2=Güneş|first2=Güliz|last3=Lipták|first3=Anikó|last4=Merchant|first4=Jason|date=2021-10-01|title=Dutch preposition stranding and ellipsis: 'Merchant's Wrinkle' ironed out|journal=The Journal of Comparative Germanic Linguistics|language=en|volume=24|issue=3|pages=269–318|doi=10.1007/s10828-021-09129-1|s2cid=243809446|issn=1572-8552|doi-access=free|hdl=1887/3246915|hdl-access=free}}</ref><ref name=":0" /> The theory of preposition stranding generalization (PSG) suggests that if a language allows preposition stranding under ''wh-''movement, that language will also allow preposition stranding under sluicing.<ref>{{Cite journal|last=NYKIEL|first=JOANNA|date=2016|title=Preposition stranding and ellipsis alternation|url=https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/english-language-and-linguistics/article/preposition-stranding-and-ellipsis-alternation-1/CC594D0EBDF102A90A2AA78F452E1AE8|journal=English Language & Linguistics|volume=21|pages=27–45|doi=10.1017/S1360674315000477|s2cid=124592131|url-access=subscription}}</ref> PSG is not obeyed universally; examples of the banning of p-stranding under sluicing are provided below.

=== Preposition stranding under sluicing === thumb|English allows prepositional stranding under sluicing. ==== In English ==== Prepositional stranding under sluicing is allowed in English because prepositional phrases are not islands in English.<ref name=":2">{{Cite journal|last=Merchant|date=2000-01-01|title=Islands and LF-movement in Greek sluicing|journal=Journal of Greek Linguistics|language=en|volume=1|issue=1|pages=41–64|doi=10.1075/jgl.1.04mer|s2cid=92992108 |issn=1569-9846|doi-access=free}}</ref> * John laughed at someone, but I don't know who <s>he laughed at</s>.<ref name=":1" />

==== In Danish ==== {{interlinear|indent=3 |Peter har snakket med en eller anden, men jeg ved ikke hvem <s>Peter</s> <s>har</s> <s>snakket</s> <s>med</s>.<ref name=":0" /> |Peter has talk.{{gcl|PP|past participle}} with one or another but I know.PRES not who <s>Peter</s> <s>has</s> <s>talk.{{gcl|PP|past participle}}</s> <s>with</s> |'Peter was talking with someone, but I don't know who.'|lang=da}}

==== In Spanish ==== {{interlinear|indent=3 |Juan ha hablado con una chica pero no sé cuál <s>Juan</s> <s>ha</s> <s>hablado</s> <s>con</s>.<ref name=":1">{{Cite journal|last1=Griffiths|first1=James|last2=Güneş|first2=Güliz|last3=Lipták|first3=Anikó|last4=Merchant|first4=Jason|date=2021-10-01|title=Dutch preposition stranding and ellipsis: 'Merchant's Wrinkle' ironed out|journal=The Journal of Comparative Germanic Linguistics|language=en|volume=24|issue=3|pages=269–318|doi=10.1007/s10828-021-09129-1|s2cid=243809446|issn=1572-8552|doi-access=free|hdl=1887/3246915|hdl-access=free}}</ref> |Juan has talk.{{gcl|PP|past participle}} with a girl but not know which <s>Juan</s> <s>has</s> <s>talk.{{gcl|PP|past participle}}</s> <s>with</s> |'Juan talked with a girl, but I don't know which.'|lang=es}}

==== In Arabic ====

===== Emirati Arabic ===== {{interlinear|indent=3 | John ʃərab gahwa. wijja sˤadiq, bəs maa ʕərf ʔaj sˤadiq <s>John</s> <s>ʃərab</s> <s>gahwa</s> <s>wijja</s>.<ref name=":0">{{Cite journal|last1=Alaowffi|first1=Nouf Yousef|last2=Alharbi|first2=Bader Yousef|date=2021-06-24|title=Preposition stranding under sluicing: Evidence from Hijazi Arabic|url=https://www.jlls.org/index.php/jlls/article/view/2404|journal=Journal of Language and Linguistic Studies|language=en|volume=17|issue=2|pages=941–957|doi=10.52462/jlls.65|s2cid=237819725|issn=1305-578X|doi-access=free}}</ref> | John drank coffee with friend but not 1.know which friend <s>John</s> <s>drank</s> <s>coffee</s> <s>with</s> |'John drank coffee with a friend, but I don't know which friend.'|lang=afb-latn}}

===== Libyan Arabic ===== {{interlinear|indent=3 | Ali tekəllem mʕa waħed lakin ma-ʕrafna-š man (hu) <s>illi</s> <s>Ali</s> <s>tekəllem</s> <s>mʕa-ah</s>.<ref name=":0">{{Cite journal|last1=Alaowffi|first1=Nouf Yousef|last2=Alharbi|first2=Bader Yousef|date=2021-06-24|title=Preposition stranding under sluicing: Evidence from Hijazi Arabic|url=https://www.jlls.org/index.php/jlls/article/view/2404|journal=Journal of Language and Linguistic Studies|language=en|volume=17|issue=2|pages=941–957|doi=10.52462/jlls.65|s2cid=237819725|issn=1305-578X|doi-access=free}}</ref> | Ali talked.3MS with someone but NEG-knew.1P-NEG who (PN.he) <s>that</s> <s>Ali</s> <s>talked.3MS</s> <s>with-him</s> |'Ali talked with someone, but we didn't know who.'|lang=ayl}}

== P-stranding in other situations == === Directional constructions === ==== In Dutch ==== A number of common Dutch adpositions can be used either prepositionally or postpositionally, with a slight change in possible meanings. For example, Dutch {{Lang|nl|in}} can mean either ''in'' or ''into'' when used prepositionally, but only mean ''into'' when used postpositionally. When postpositions, such adpositions can be stranded: * '''short-distance movement''':<!-- maybe clearer than "scrambling"? --> {{interlinear|indent=3 |[...] dat hij '''zo'n''' '''donker''' '''bos''' niet '''in''' durft te lopen [...] |[...] that he '''such-a''' '''dark''' '''forest''' not '''into''' dares to walk [...] |'[...] that he doesn't dare walk into such a dark forest [...]'|lang=nl}}

* Another way to analyze examples like the one above would be to allow arbitrary "postposition + verb" sequences to act as transitive separable prefix verbs (e.g. {{Lang|nl|in}} ''+'' {{Lang|nl|lopen}} → {{Lang|nl|inlopen}}), but such an analysis would not be consistent with the position of ''in'' in the second example. (The postposition can also appear in the verbal prefix position: ''[...]'' {{Lang|nl|dat hij zo'n donker bos niet durft in te lopen}} ''[...]''.)

=== Pseudopassives === ==== In English ==== Pseudopassives (prepositional passives or passive constructions) are the result of the movement of the object of a preposition to fill an empty subject position for a passive verb. The phenomenon is comparable to regular passives, which are formed through the movement of the object of the verb to subject position. In prepositional passives, unlike in ''wh-''movement, the object of the preposition is not a ''wh-''word but rather a pronoun or noun phrase:

* This bed looks as if '''it''' has been slept '''in'''.{{efn|name=Generative grammar}}<ref name="Huddleston 2002, pp 1433–6">{{Cite book|last1=Huddleston|first1=Rodney|title=The Cambridge Grammar of the English Language|last2=Pullum|first2=Geoffrey|publisher=Cambridge University Press|year=2002|isbn=0-521-43146-8|location=Cambridge; New York|pages=1433–1436|author-link1=Rodney Huddleston|author-link2=Geoffrey Pullum}}</ref>

==== In French ==== * Some dialects permit proposition-stranding. **{{Lang|fr|Robert a été parlé beaucoup '''de''' au meeting.}} ** 'Robert was much talked '''about''' at the meeting.' * Standard French bans it. **{{Lang|fr|On a beaucoup parlé '''de''' Robert au meeting.}}

=== Relative clauses === ==== In English ==== Relative clauses in English can exhibit preposition stranding with or without an explicit relative pronoun: *This is '''the book''' '''that''' I told you '''about'''.{{efn|name=Generative grammar}} *This is '''the book''' I told you '''about'''.

==== In French ==== To standard French ears, all of those constructions sound quite alien and are thus considered barbarisms or {{Lang|fr|anglicismes}}.

However, not all dialects of French allow preposition stranding to the same extent. For instance, Ontario French restricts preposition stranding to relative clauses with certain prepositions. In most dialects, stranding is impossible with the prepositions {{Lang|fr|à}} 'to' and {{Lang|fr|de}} 'of'.

A superficially-similar construction is possible in standard French in cases where the object is not moved but implied, such as {{Lang|fr|Je suis pour}} 'I'm all for (it)' or {{Lang|fr|Il faudra agir selon}} 'We'll have to act according to (the situation)'.

* Some dialects permit **{{Lang|fr|Tu connais pas la fille que je te parle '''de'''.}} ** 'You don't know the girl that I'm talking to you '''about'''.' * Standard French requires **{{Lang|fr|Tu ne connais pas la fille '''dont''' je te parle.}} * Another more widespread non-standard variant is **{{Lang|fr|Tu ne connais pas la fille '''que''' je te parle.}}

=== ''R''-pronouns === ==== In Dutch ==== Dutch prepositions generally do not take the ordinary neuter pronouns ({{Lang|nl|het}}, {{Lang|nl|dat}}, {{Lang|nl|wat}}, etc.) as objects. Instead, they become postpositional suffixes for the corresponding ''r''-pronouns ({{Lang|nl|er}}, {{Lang|nl|daar}}, {{Lang|nl|waar}}, etc.): hence, not *{{Lang|nl|'''over''' het}} (''''about''' it'), but {{Lang|nl|er'''over'''}} (literally 'there'''about'''<nowiki/>'). However, the ''r''-pronouns can sometimes be moved to the left and thereby strand the postposition:<ref name="Riemsdijk et al.">{{Cite book|author1-link=Henk van Riemsdijk|last1=van Riemsdijk|first1=Henk|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=9tEjAwAAQBAJ|title=Syntax of Dutch: adpositions and adpositional phrases|last2=Kenesei|first2=Istvan|last3=Broekhuis|first3=Hans|date=2015|publisher=Amsterdam University Press|isbn=978-9048522255|pages=294ff|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160826031829/https://books.google.de/books?id=9tEjAwAAQBAJ|archive-date=2016-08-26|url-status=live}}</ref>

{{interlinear|indent=3 | Wij praatten '''er''' niet '''over'''. | We talked '''there''' not '''about'''. | 'We didn't talk about it.'|lang=nl}}

=== Split construction === ==== In German ==== Some regional varieties of German show a similar phenomenon to some Dutch constructions with {{Lang|de|da(r)-}} and {{Lang|de|wo(r)-}} forms. That is called a ''split construction'' ({{Lang|de|Spaltkonstruktion}}). Standard German provides composite words for the particle and the bound preposition. The split occurs easily with a composite interrogative word (as shown in the English example) or with a composite demonstrative word (as shown in the Dutch example).

For example, the demonstrative {{Lang|de|davon}} ('of that / of those / thereof'): *Standard German requires {{interlinear|indent=3 |Ich kann mir '''davon''' nichts leisten. |I can me '''thereof''' nothing afford. |'I can't afford any of those.'|lang=de}}

*Some dialects permit {{interlinear|indent=3 |Ich kann mir '''da''' nichts '''von''' leisten. |I can me '''there'''-[clipped] nothing '''of''' afford. |'I can't afford any of those.'|lang=de}}

Again, although the stranded postposition has nearly the same surface distribution as a separable verbal prefix ({{Lang|de|herbekommen}} is a valid composite verb), it would not be possible to analyze these Dutch and German examples in terms of the reanalyzed verbs *{{Lang|nl|overpraten}} and *{{Lang|de|vonkaufen}}, for the following reasons:

*The stranding construction is possible with prepositions that never appear as separable verbal prefixes (e.g., Dutch {{Lang|nl|van}}, German {{Lang|de|von}}). *Stranding is not possible with any kind of object besides an ''r''-pronoun. *Prefixed verbs are stressed on the prefix; in the string {{Lang|de|von kaufen}} in the above sentences, the preposition cannot be accented. ** Also, pronunciation allows distinguishing an actual usage of a verb like {{Lang|de|herbekommen}} from a split construction {{Lang|de|her bekommen}}.

== Controversy == === In English === Although preposition stranding has been found in English since the earliest times,<ref>O'Conner and Kellerman 2009. p. 22. "It's perfectly natural to put a preposition at the end of a sentence, and it has been since Anglo-Saxon times."</ref> it has often been the subject of controversy, and some usage advisors have attempted to form a prescriptive rule against it.

The earliest attested disparagement of preposition stranding in English is datable to the 17th-century grammarian Joshua Poole,<ref name="Webster">{{Cite web|url=https://www.merriam-webster.com/words-at-play/prepositions-ending-a-sentence-with|title=Prepositions, Ending a Sentence With|access-date=2022-01-13|website=Miriam Webster}}</ref> but it became popular after 1672, when the poet John Dryden objected to Ben Jonson's 1611 phrase "the bodies that those souls were frighted from". Dryden did not explain why he thought the sentence should be restructured to front the preposition.<ref name="Huddleston 2002">{{Cite book|last1=Huddleston|first1=Rodney|title=The Cambridge Grammar of the English Language|last2=Pullum|first2=Geoffrey|publisher=Cambridge University Press|year=2002|isbn=0-521-43146-8|location=Cambridge; New York|author-link1=Rodney Huddleston|author-link2=Geoffrey Pullum}}</ref><ref>John Dryden, [https://books.google.com/books?id=-0k4AAAAIAAJ&pg=PA140 "Defense of the Epilogue"] to ''The Conquest of Granada''.</ref> In his earlier writing, Dryden himself had employed terminal prepositions but he systematically removed them in later editions of his work, explaining that when in doubt he would translate his English into Latin to test its elegance.<ref name="Fowler" /> Latin has no construction comparable to preposition stranding.

Usage writer Robert Lowth wrote in his 1762 textbook ''A Short Introduction to English Grammar'' that the construction was more suitable for informal than for formal English: "This is an Idiom which our language is strongly inclined to; it prevails in common conversation, and suits very well with the familiar style in writing; but the placing of the Preposition before the Relative is more graceful, as well as more perspicuous; and agrees much better with the solemn and elevated Style."<ref>{{Cite book|last=Lowth|first=Robert|url=https://archive.org/details/ashortintroduct00lowtgoog|title=A Short Introduction to English Grammar: With Critical Notes|publisher=J.J. Tourneisin|year=1794|pages=[https://archive.org/details/ashortintroduct00lowtgoog/page/n138 133]–134|access-date=5 August 2016|orig-year=Digitalized version of book published in 1794}}</ref> However Lowth used the construction himself, including a humorously self-referential example in this passage ("is strongly inclined to"), and his comments do not amount to a proscription.

A stronger view was taken by Edward Gibbon, who not only disparaged sentence-terminal prepositions but, noting that prepositions and adverbs are often difficult to distinguish, also avoided phrasal verbs which put ''on, over'' or ''under'' at the end of the sentence, even when these are clearly adverbs.<ref name="Fowler" />{{efn|For more on the distinction between verbs with particles (called adverbs in older texts) and those with prepositional phrases, see English phrasal verbs#Types}} By the 19th century, the tradition of English school teaching had come to deprecate the construction, and the proscription is still taught in some schools at the beginning of the 21st century.<ref name="Cutts 2009. p. 109" />

However, there were also voices which took an opposite view. In his ''Dictionary of Modern English Usage'' (1926), H. W. Fowler noted: "It is a cherished superstition that prepositions must, in spite of the incurable English instinct for putting them late [...] be kept true to their name & placed before the word they govern."<ref>{{Cite book|title=A Dictionary of Modern English Usage|last=Fowler|first=Henry Watson|publisher=OUP|year=1926|pages=457|chapter=Preposition at end}} (cited from the revised ed. 1940). Similarly Burchfield in the 1996 version: "One of the most persistent myths about prepositions in English is that they properly belong before the word or words they govern and should not be placed at the end of a clause or sentence." Burchfield 1996. p. 617.</ref> Fowler dedicated four columns of the ''Dictionary'' to a rebuttal of the prescription:<ref name="Fowler">{{Cite book|title=A Dictionary of Modern English Usage|last=Fowler|first=Henry Watson|publisher=OUP|year=1926|pages=458|chapter=Preposition at end}} (cited from the revised ed. 1940).</ref> {{Blockquote|text=The fact is that the remarkable freedom enjoyed by English in putting its prepositions late & omitting its relatives is an important element in the flexibility of the language. [...] ''That depends on what they are cut with'' is not improved by conversion into ''That depends on with what they are cut''; & too often the lust of sophistication, once blooded, becomes uncontrollable, & ends with, ''That depends on the answer to the question as to with what they are cut.''}}

Criticizing the controversy over preposition stranding, American linguist Don Ringe stated:<ref>{{Cite book |last=Ringe |first=Don |url=https://www.cambridge.org/core/product/identifier/9781108605533/type/book |title=An Introduction to Grammar for Language Learners |date=2018-08-23 |publisher=Cambridge University Press |isbn=978-1-108-60553-3 |edition=1 |doi=10.1017/9781108605533 |page=202 |chapter=Epilogue: "Bad Grammar"}}</ref>

{{Blockquote|text=The original reason for the objection, apparently, was that Latin has no such construction (or, with a bit more sophistication, that few other languages have such a construction). In other words, people who objected to preposition stranding were insisting that English grammar should be like Latin. That's perverse – English isn't Latin and isn't even descended from Latin...}}

Overzealous avoidance of stranded prepositions was sometimes ridiculed for leading to unnatural-sounding sentences, including the quip apocryphally attributed to Winston Churchill: ''This is the sort of tedious nonsense up with which I will not put.''<ref>{{cite web|date=12 December 2004|title=A misattribution no longer to be put up with|url=http://itre.cis.upenn.edu/~myl/languagelog/archives/001715.html|url-status=live|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20150907191637/http://itre.cis.upenn.edu/~myl/languagelog/archives/001715.html|archive-date=7 September 2015|access-date=5 January 2013|work=Language Log}}</ref>

Today, most sources consider it to be acceptable in standard formal English.<ref name="Cutts 2009. p. 109">Cutts 2009. p. 109.</ref><ref name="ReferenceA">O'Conner and Kellerman 2009. p. 21.</ref><ref name="ReferenceB">{{cite web|url= http://grammar.quickanddirtytips.com/top-ten-grammar-myths.aspx|title= Top Ten Grammar Myths|author-link= Mignon Fogarty|last= Fogarty|first= Mignon|date= 4 March 2010|work= Grammar Girl: Quick and Dirty Tips for Better Writing|access-date= 28 May 2011|ref= Fog10|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110313005122/https://grammar.quickanddirtytips.com/top-ten-grammar-myths.aspx|archive-date=13 March 2011}}</ref> As O'Conner and Kellerman point out: "Great literature from Chaucer to Milton to Shakespeare to the King James version of the Bible was full of so called terminal prepositions."<ref name="ReferenceA" /> Mignon Fogarty ("Grammar Girl") says, "nearly all grammarians agree that it's fine to end sentences with prepositions, at least in some cases."<ref>{{cite book |title= Grammar Girl Presents the Ultimate Writing Guide for Students |author-link=Mignon Fogarty|last= Fogarty|first= Mignon|year= 2011|publisher= Henry Holt & Company|location= New York|isbn= 978-0-8050-8943-1|pages= 45–46|ref=Fog11}}</ref>

== Sources == * {{cite book |title=Oxford Guide to Plain English|edition= Third|last= Cutts|first= Martin|year= 2009|publisher= Oxford University Press|location= Oxford|isbn= 978-0-19-955850-6|ref=Cut09}} * {{cite book |title=Origins of the Specious: Myths and Misconceptions of the English Language|last1= O'Conner|first1= Patricia T.|last2= Kellerman|first2= Stewart |year= 2009|publisher= Random House|location= New York|isbn= 978-0-8129-7810-0|ref=CK09|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=hsu47CBwJPUC&pg=PA21}}

== Notes == {{Notelist}}

==See also== *Dangling modifier

== References == {{Reflist}}

== Further reading == * [http://itre.cis.upenn.edu/~myl/languagelog/archives/000743.html An Internet pilgrim's guide to stranded prepositions] *Haegeman, Liliane, and Jacqueline Guéron. 1999. ''English Grammar: a Generative Perspective''. Oxford: Blackwell. {{ISBN|0-631-18839-8}}. * Hornstein, Norbert, and Amy Weinberg. 1981. "Case theory and preposition stranding." ''Linguistic Inquiry'' 12:55–91. {{Cite journal| first1 = N. | date = 1 January 1981| last2 = Weinberg | first2 = A. | title = Case Theory and Preposition Stranding | journal = Linguistic Inquiry | volume = 12 | issue = 1 | issn = 0024-3892| last1 = Hornstein | jstor = 4178205| pages = 55–91}} * Koopman, Hilda. 2000. "Prepositions, postpositions, circumpositions, and particles." In ''The Syntax of Specifiers and Heads'', pp.&nbsp;204–260. London: Routledge. {{ISBN|0-415-16183-5}}. * {{cite web| last=Lundin|first=Leigh |title=The Power of Prepositions |url=http://criminalbrief.com/?p=216 |work=On Writing |publisher=Criminal Brief |location=Cairo |date=2007-09-23 }} * Takami, Ken-ichi. 1992. ''Preposition Stranding: From Syntactic to Functional Analyses''. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. {{ISBN|3-11-013376-8}}. * van Riemsdijk, Henk. 1978. ''A Case Study in Syntactic Markedness: The Binding Nature of Prepositional Phrases''. Dordrecht: Foris. {{ISBN|90-316-0160-8}}. *Fowler, Henry. 1926. "Preposition at end." A Dictionary of Modern English Usage. Oxford: Clarendon Press. Wordsworth Edition reprint, 1994, {{ISBN|1-85326-318-4}} {{lexical categories|state=collapsed}}

{{DEFAULTSORT:Preposition Stranding}} Category:Parts of speech Category:Word order Category:English usage controversies Category:Syntactic transformation Category:Prepositions