Prepositions in compounds

The linguists I quoted suggest that prepositions cannot be inserted between the compound elements (e.g. mother-of-pearl would not be a compound for them) or that they cannot form compounds in general?

Fly-by-night citizenship tutoring for immigrants know all the shortcuts , for example

Pick-me-up. Grown-up. Face-to-face.

What you can understand, is the linguist Pavol Stekauer, perhaps doesn't know what structures to question and doesn't know what is and what is not correct in English. And I suggest you reach out to him directly. He might still be in what is listed as his current position on a Web site:
Professor in English Linguistics, Department of British and American Studies, Faculty of Arts, P. J. Šafárik University, Kosice, Slovakia

I checked, and he is on staff there. Here is his contact information:
http://kaa.ff.upjs.sk/en/people/120/prof-dr-pavel-stekauer-dr-sc

I would like to know what he says, so please come back and post his response. Thank you so much.

I was just asking about your comments on the matter. That is it.

"How should I understand the fact that "prepositions are not permitted" in compounds?"

Who says it's a fact? Who says it's not permitted?

I would question anyone who claims such a fact or who deigns to give permission. There's nowhere that says that prepositions are not permitted in compounds. Who would say such a thing?

Language is a living, fluid, and almost elusive thing. As soon as you think you understand it, it devilishly slips the other way.

New words come in, new compounds are made, new meanings attached to words that once meant something else.

In addition to the written language, getting the correct meaning behind the spoken language can be even more challenging.

For example, "There's a bit of a drip outside."

Spoken by an American that might mean the outside faucet is leaking, but by someone in Great Britain, perhaps, the speaker might be employing understatement and actually be referring to a deluge.

I question anyone who claims a fact in language. As soon as something in language does become a fact, it quickly morphs into something else.

"Hyphenate compound adjectives whose final constituent is an adverb of direction or place (in, out, down, up, etc.) when they precede the noun:

a built-up area
a drive-by shooting
all-out competition
the trickle-down theory"

http://www.btb.termiumplus.gc.ca/tcdnstyl-chap?lang=eng&lettr=chapsect2&info0=2

"With compound adjectives formed from the adverb well and a participle (e.g. well-known), or from a phrase (e.g. up-to-date), you should use a hyphen when the compound comes before the noun:

well-known brands of coffee

an up-to-date account"

https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/punctuation/hyphen

And also later from the same Web page: "If a phrasal verb is made into a noun, though, you SHOULD use a hyphen: Noun

Example

build-up. There was a build-up of traffic on the ring road.

break-in. The house was unoccupied at the time of the break-in.

stop-off. We knew there would be a stop-off in Singapore for refueling."

Here's the list from The Chicago Manual of Style regarding hyphenation. You will see some conjunctions also used with hyphens here: http://www.chicagomanualofstyle.org/16/images/ch07_tab01.pdf

Thank you for the information.

You are welcome. I know it was a lot and I'm sorry if I got agitated. I just didn't like the sound of that didactic comment regarding what is and is not permitted in language. I would have reached out to the author myself. Do you have the title of the book and the exact quote? Can you provide more of what he was saying? I'd like to read that comment in context. Perhaps it is a bad translation. Was it written in English? Or translated? I also would like to know the date of publication, which is why I looked the author up online. Writing about language is the most difficult type of writing there is. I read that somewhere. It's enormously difficult. Perhaps the translation is lacking in this particular instance.