The Printable KISS Workbooks KISS Workbooks Anthology
(Code and Color Key)

Prepositions that Follow their Objects (#2)
Based on Black Beauty, by Anna Sewell
Analysis Key

    The following explanations may seem strange, and probably would be highly debated by grammarians, but it is difficult to find grammarians who address this question.

1. "Do you know [DO what [#1] they fought about?"] [ [#2] said I]. |

2. There was nobody (PN) [Adj. to "nobody" we knew] to trust in [#3]. |

3. I have no meadows (DO) to nurse sick horses in [#4]. |

4. This was the sort (PN) {of experience} [Adj. to "sort" we job horses often

came in for [#5] ]. |

5. Then it was wonderful (PA) [ [#6] what a number [#7] {of places} the 

master would go to {in the city} {on Saturday}], and [ [#6] what queer 

streets [#7] we were driven (P) through]. |

6. Good Luck is rather particular (PA) {*about* [OP who she drives 

with [#8] ] } . |

1. "What" functions simultaneously as the subordinating conjunction and the object of the preposition "about."
2. The preferred explanation of this clause within KISS is to see it as an interjection. Traditional grammars rarely, if ever, discuss the question, but alternatively within KISS it can be considered the main clause with the "Do you know ...." clause as its object. See KISS Level 3.2.3 - Interjection? Or Direct Object?
3. The infinitive "to trust" functions as an adjective to "nobody." The "in" could be left off, but we can't say that it is incorrect, because many people naturally include it because we normally want to trust in *somebody,* which is the opposite of "nobody."
4. "Horses" is the direct object of the infinitive "to nurse" which functions as an adjective to "meadows" and/or an adverb to "have." The "in is similar to the one in the preceding sentence -- its object is an understood "meadows."
5. "Horses" is an appositive to "we." "Came in for" means "had," so it can be explained as an idiomatic form of that word and thus the finite verb. But the sentence means "we job horses often came in for that sort of experience." Thus in the "came in for" literal sense, we could see "for that sort" as a prepositional phrase.
6. The two subordinate clauses function as delayed subjects. See KISS Level 5.6.
7. "Number" is the object of the preposition "to" -- "the master would go to what a number of places." Similarly, "streets" is the object of the preposition "through."
8. Most grammarians would say that "who" should be "whom," but :"who" is in the text. It functions as the object of the preposition "with" -- "she drives with whom." Its initial position in the clause may be the reason for "who" instead of "whom." (The same may explain some  students' problems with "who/whom."