English Final Prepositions Make No Sense... !!
All English speakers use them. I use them too. But they make no sense.
For example, 'Where do you come from ?'... Makes no sense, except in the sense that this is the standard form that we use.
We might also say, 'From where do you come ?' (or even, daringly, 'From where come you ?') and this (these) would, in my opinion, make more logical sense. Certainly, 'From where do you come ?' would not be considered wrong (in my opinion it is, actually, more correct), albeit slightly odd or antiquated.
I'm not sure at what point in the history of the English language we lost our sense of logic in this regard. We actually even used to say 'Whence do you come ?' or 'Whence come you ?' or 'Whither do you go ?' or 'Whither go you ?', which are nice, but I can see how they might confuse some folk.
I think some other Germanic languages do something similar, but I'm not sure & have always been more of a fan of Romance languages, anyway.
In any event, for non-native English-speakers, if how we use our prepositions confuses you, please appreciate it doesn't confuse me, but it does frustrate me. The way (in which) Spanish uses them makes much more sense... 
8 Answers
Winston Churchill is reported to have said: "Ending a sentence with a preposition is something up with which I will not put."
To me this is the "poster child sentence" for understanding "phrasal verbs" in English. Whether we like them or loathe them, they are part of the English language and add in complexity to the language what it lacks in verbal inflections that Romance languages have in such abundance.
The other anomaly about English is that it weds Anglo-Saxon (Old English) with Medieval French (Langue d'oïl) and Latin neither of which are related closely. I'm sure there's a measure of Celtic languages added as well. I have heard that the rule about not ending a sentence with a preposition is more a Latin rule than an English one.
Prepositions are so frequently used to color (colour) meanings that native English speakers sometimes think that the contraction "should've" is spelled "should of"!
Just think that the word "up" in the phrasal verbs give up, wake up, catch up, and dry up does not mean the same thing: up to another, up from sleep, up from behind and up from evaporation.
When I cover phrasal verbs in my ESL classes I try to show a single verb that conveys the same meaning and almost always those single verbs are from the Latin or French roots of the language.
I hope our English learners here can benefit from this post as much and you (Falda-Escosa) and I have. Where did all this come from (originate)?
I don't wish to put the cat among the pigeons, but there is, in fact, no formal rule of English grammar that prohibits the ending of a sentence with a preposition. There is a class of sentences which must be ended by prepositions! For example:
"This seat is very uncomfortable to sit in"
The transposition of this sentence to avoid the ending preposition yields an awkward and pedantic:
"To sit in this seat is very uncomfortable"
How about:
"Was it worth waiting for?"
Cheers
You know what doesn't make sense to me? How Spanish doesn't have to indicate the subject. Sentence like "Camino a la escuela" and "Ayer me cantó una canción" are so common and I'll admit it (I say them too). But it makes no sense and is totally illogical. How on earth am I supposed to figure out who the sentence is about if there's no subject?
I wonder where in the evolution of Spanish did it lose this logic. Can you even have an action without someone doing it? I know tons of languages (called "Pro-drop languages") do this, but I'm not a fan.
Haha, I'm kidding. But really, I use sentences with prepositions at the end all the time. Trying to awkwardly shuffle around putting the proposition at the end of the sentence sounds weird to me. There's no reason to expect Spanish grammar and English grammar to work the same way. That's what makes languages fun! Nothing makes sense (except to native speakers)!
Why jump through hoops to avoid something that is perfectly intelligible to a reader and is not violating any rule of English grammar? Elegance is a subjective thing. Shakespeare, Swift, and Kipling used ending prepositions.
"And do such bitter business as the day would quake to look on" (Shakespeare)
"The present argument is the most abstracted that I have ever engaged in" (Swift)
"...too horrible to be trifled with" (Kipling)
I have taken these quotations from "Writer's Manual" by Martin Manser and Stephen Curtis.
Cheers
hehe I like the Winston Churchill quote, Jubilado. Who woulda thunk?
A quick comment from me.
Quechua - an Andean language - has no prepositions.
It is not possible to say " Look through the window. "
Of course originally most speakers of Quechua had no need to say it because windows were not for looking through - they had no glass in them and were there to let light in. (to let in light)
I don't think Hungarian has any prepositions.
Thank you, all, for up voting mine post
It's not so much about rules as logic and elegance.
'This seat is very uncomfortable to sit in' could be rendered simply ''This seat is very uncomfortable'. Here 'to sit' is redundant anyway because it's already suggested by the nature of the seat. Or you could say 'This seat is very uncomfortable for sitting'.
'Was it worth waiting for ?' could be rendered 'Was it worth the wait ?' or 'Was it worth waiting for it' or 'Was it worth awaiting ?', all of which avoid a final proposition.
I agree some expressions do make it very difficult to avoid a final preposition without sounding unnatural, stilted or awkward, but in the vast majority of cases where a final preposition is used, it could be avoided, usually rendering the sentence more elegant in any event. This is particularly so of written English where the author has time to marshal and compose his thoughts.
