Search results for 'tag:Numbers tag:Indirect objects' matching tags 'Numbers' and 'Indirect objects'

Re: About the meaning of "where"

Velimir — Tue, 12 Feb 2008 22:11:58 GMT

I'll try to give some information on this as a non-professional.This is how it looks like in the serbian language,and I suppose,it is very similar in all other slavic languages and also the latin language.

For indicating a location the locative case of a noun is used.If the english language had similar declension of nouns then the nouns following the prepositions "in" and "at" would be in the locative case.The presence of the preceding preposition is obligatory when the noun is in the locative case.

But,if the verb indicates motion,or in plain english,if you are :
going to, flying to, traveling to..

like in the question given in the opening post,then the noun will be in the dative case.This case you can connect with the nouns following the preposition "to" although the preposition is not necessarily present.The word "dative" derives from latin "dare" which means "to give" and the usage is most obvious on the example of that verb:

I gave my girlfriend a flower.

If you translated this in serbian,"girlfriend" would be in the dative case.Indirect object is in the dative case.The direct object ("a flower") is in the accusative case.

"Cases play a major part in determining a noun's syntactic role in the sentence, so word order is not as important in Latin as it is in other languages, such as English. Because of noun cases, words can often be moved around in a sentence without significantly altering its meaning, though the emphasis will have altered" (from a Wikipedia article on the latin language)
Btw,changing nouns,adjectives,pronouns and numbers to different cases is pretty tough area of the language with more cases,and is often lifelong mistery for many natives,and I know that well.Luckily,english is not a case-sensitive language.

Best regards

Re: direct object indirect object object of a preposition help me! plz

ClarkePeters — Fri, 04 Jan 2008 17:12:39 GMT

This post is a little dated but since I've been working with my students on this very topic I thought I'd post.

First, you can't understand what the "object of the preposition" is if you don't first know how to identify prepositions. So you need to find a list (google "list prepositions English" or "frequency list prepositions English") and you should get plenty of lists. Depending on which list you go by, there are from 80 to 130 or so prepositions. Most are not used too often, so I'd get a frequency list and try to learn the first 50 or so.   That may sound like a lot of words, but compared to the number of words in Webster's 500,000 word dictionary, that's really very few words--and they are SO IMPORTANT to understanding sentence structure. If you don't want to memorize, no problem, just keep a list with you at all times.

When you come across a word from the list, check to see if it has an object by asking "what" after the preposition.
              John called about the party.
              about what? the party,
              so "party" or "the party" if you include the article, is the object of the preposition.

Be careful, prepositions sometimes act as adverbs.
John got up and went to the kitchen.
up what? ---ummmm, no answer, there is NO object, so "up" is an adverb to "got"

as for DO, ask "what" after the verb.

John made a cake.
John made what? a cake
DO is cake

as for IO, ask "to whom/what?" or "for whom/what?" after the DO
John made Mary a cake.
John made what? a cake
DO is cake
a cake for whom? for Mary
IO is Mary.

The following sentences are exactly the same in meaning! (except maybe in emphasis)

John made Mary a cake.         common usage
John made for Mary a cake.   NOT common usage, but technically
                                                  correct, sometimes used for emphasis
John made a cake for Mary.    common usage

same with "to"
John gave Mary a cake.
John gave to Mary a cake.   NOT common usage
John gave a cake to Mary.

some grammarians will say that an IO can ONLY be between the verb and DO.
Other linguists say functionally there is no difference, so it is OK to say that "to Mary" or "for Mary" is the IO. However, others will argue that they are adverbials answering the question where (to) or why (for) about the verb (made why? for Mary    gave where? to Mary).
How one describes it is not important, as they all function the same.

Re: Grammar errors?

Alienvoord — Thu, 31 Aug 2006 01:05:25 GMT

"than me" sounds much more normal to me than "than I".

http://andromeda.rutgers.edu/~jlynch/Writing/t.html

Than, as used in comparatives, has traditionally been considered a conjunction; as such, if you're comparing subjects, the pronouns after than should take the "subjective case." In other words, "He's taller than I," not "He's taller than me"; "She's smarter than he," not "She's smarter than him." If, on the other hand, you're comparing direct or indirect objects, the pronouns should be objective: "I've never worked with a more difficult client than him."

There are some advantages to this traditional state of affairs. If you observe this distinction, you can be more precise in some comparisons. Consider these two sentences:

He has more friends than I. (His total number of friends is higher than my total number of friends.)
He has more friends than me. (I'm not his only friend; he has others.)
The problem, though, is that in all but the most formal contexts, "than I" sounds stuffy, even unidiomatic. Most people, in most contexts, treat than as a preposition, and put all following pronouns in the objective case, whether the things being compared are subjects or objects. "He's taller than me" sounds more natural to most native English speakers.

This isn't a recent development: people have been treating than as a preposition for centuries. Consider the following from big-name English and American writers:

Matthew Prior, Better Answer: "For thou art a girl as much brighter than her,/ As he was a poet sublimer than me."
Samuel Richardson's Clarissa, 1.10.58, "I am fitter for this world than you, you for the next than me."
Lord Byron's letter of 2 November 1804, "Lord Delawarr is considerably younger than me."
Robert Southey, Well of St. Keyne, 51: "She had been wiser than me,/ For she took a bottle to Church."
William Faulkner's Reivers, 4.82: "Let Lucius get out . . . He's younger than me and stouter too for his size."

Re: The meaning of 'Gonna'

Anonymous — Sun, 29 Jan 2006 07:43:18 GMT

What is the word sucks in "Homework sucks"? Is it a verb or an adjective? If it is a verb, what does homework suck?

This brings up an excellent point, and a wonderful opportunity to discover the beautiful syntactic structure of the English language. The question at hand is "Does an English verb need to have an object?" Consider the simple construction, "I eat" (Subject-ActionVerb). It is a coherent English thought; there is no need to express what is eaten. Just because an English sentence contains an action verb does not mean an object of that action must occur. The neat thing is, though, that it can occur and the thought is just as coherent. "I eat pizza" (Subject-ActionVerb-Object) is an equally logical thought.

Action verbs that have an object of their action are said to be transitive, while those that do not are said to be intransitive. Objects can receive the action of their verb either directly or indirectly. An object which is indirectly acted upon only occurs when there is one which is directly acted upon as well. Objects which receive their verb's action directly are said to be direct, whereas those which receive it indirectly are said to be indirect. In the sentence "I baked them pizza," pizza is a direct object, and them is an indirect object.

We have observed three fundamental patterns of the English language:
                        Subject-IntransitiveVerb                                              (S-InV)                I eat.
                        Subject-TransitiveVerb-DirectObject                          (S-TrV-DO)         I eat pizza.
                        Subject-TransitiveVerb-IndirectObject-DirectObject (S-TrV-IO-DO)    I bake them pizza.

As it turns out, the entire English language follows only about six different fundamental patterns, depending on how you count them. Essentially, there are only three more. I find this fascinating, so here I have written a short exposition on the topic. I intend to learn as much from those who view this forum as they can learn from me, so please read, enjoy (hopefully), and critique it.

        An Inquiry into the Syntactical Structure of the English Language

Fundamental Parts of Speech
There exist various schemes that depict the fundamental parts of speech in the English language. The underlying assumption of them all is that every English word can be classified into a fairly small number of categories. According to a word's inherent qualities these are somewhat nebulous, but according to how the word is used in a sentence they our definitive. The scheme I adopt here models English words in seven divisions: nouns* (N), verbs (V), adjectives** (Adj), adverbs (Adv), prepositions (Prep), conjunctions (Conj), and interjections (Interj). No attempt will be put forth to define these whether operationally or inherently. That being beyond the scope of this work
*Nouns in this work refers to both nouns and pronouns. Though they constitute two distinct categories they are used virtually interchangeably distinguishable only by the inherent qualities they possess. (A point in which syntax is largely uninterested.)
**This class contains what other schemes might divide into the categories of articles, determiners, qualifiers, modifying nouns, etc.
A Steal Framework
Again the various models of English syntax would number the fundamental patterns differently. I have adopted a scheme of six. The patterns are concerned only with two parts of speech: verbs and nouns. They form a sort of a metal framework upon which the rest of the fundamental part bestow their graces connecting and decorating it into a beautiful masterpiece. I model English nouns as possessing eight unique functions (subject (S), direct object (DO), indirect object (IO), objective complement (OC), subjective complement (SC), object of the preposition (OP), noun of direct address (DA), and appositive (App)) and English verbs as possessing four unique functions (action verb*, linking verb (LV), state of being verb (Be), helping verb** (Aux)). Only the first five of the noun functions and the first three of the verb functions are used in constructing the patterns. The rest are added on later for decoration.
*As it has been aforementioned actions verbs are either transitive verbs (TrV), possessing objects, or intransitive verbs (InV), not possessing objects.
**Helping verbs also known as auxiliary verbs or simply auxiliaries serve solely to aid the one main verb of a syntactic pattern in expressing such complexities as tense, mood, or voice. Unlike other languages, English verb ending are unable to accomplish this consisting of only four principle parts with little variation or no variation for person or number. Rarely will you find a verb written more than four ways.

The Fundamental Syntactic Patterns
Some schemes include adjective and adverb elements. I do not, however, because I do not consider them the pegs on which other elements can hang. They are merely filler. I have put alternate examples in boldface type for where some find grounds for other patterns.

                                            1. S-Be*                    I am. or I am here.
                                            2. S-LV-SC*,*              I am Daniel. or I am good.
                                            3. S-InV                         I eat.
                                            4. S-TrV-DO*                I eat pizza.
                                            5. S-TrV-IO-DO*        I bake them pizza.
                                            6. S-TrV-DO-OC*,*    I consider pizza food. or I find pizza tasty.
* "I am here," or, "I am of the tribe of Benjamin," are examples of an adverb element on the S-Be pattern. Under some schemes this would be a new pattern, S-be-Adv. The adverb element, often referred to as the adverbial modifies the verb indicating where or when.
*The subjective complement is the completer of the subject. If it is an adjective it is called the predicate adjective (PA). If it is a noun it is called the predicate nominative or noun (PN). As a noun it is said to rename the subject (Daniel). As a adjective it is said to modify the subject (good). Under some schemes these two cases form distinct patterns (S-LV-PN and S-LV-PA).
*Depending on whether or not the definition of linking verb is broadened to include the state of being verbs, a separate pattern (S-be-SC) is often employed which in turn is typically divided into the two distinct patterns (S-be-PA and S-be-PN).
*Both direct and indirect objects are considered to be predicate complements (PC). So the distinction between them is sometimes lost and these patterns can be depicted S-TrV-PC, S-TrV-PC-PC, and S-TrV-PC-OC with the former two occasionally fusing into one pattern (S-TrV-PC).
*Sometimes a distinction is made between an objective complement that functions as a noun (pizza), objective noun (ON), and one that functions as a adjective (tasty), objective adjective (OA). Thus two distinct patterns are formed (S-TrV-DO-ON and S-TrV-DO-OA).

Whether or not it is wise to exclude the patterns S-Be-Adv, S-LV-PA, and S-TrV-OA, I do not know, but since I maintain that the fundamental syntactic units are composed of certain nouns and verbs I will. For now the other parts of speech and remaining nouns and verbs are for filling out the framework.

The Decorations and Connections
The remaining verbs, helping/auxiliary verbs (Aux), come before the verbs in the patterns and give them tense. Of the remaining nouns, nouns of direct address (DA) are when you address the person you are talking two by name, appositives come right after one of the nouns in the fundamental patterns and serve to rename them, and objects of the preposition are the words the prepositions (Prep) are relating to the rest of the sentence. Prepositions (Prep) then relate nouns to the rest of the sentence. Conjunction (Conj) join elements whether they be fundamental patterns, subject, or verbs. Interjections (Interj) do just that. Butt in breaking the flow of everything. Adjectives (Adj) modify nouns, and adverbs (Adv) modify verbs, adjectives, and other adverbs.

These nine links and flesh may simply be one word or, as four of them (OP, App, Adj, and Adv) often are, be expanded into multiword units composed themselves of smaller units which in turn are linked to other units. Thus you have the massive interlocking structure of the English language.

What are these large units with in units though? They are either clauses or phrases.

Clauses
Clause contain both a subject and a verb but cannot stand alone as a complete thought. They are one of the fundamental units fleshed out. They come in three varieties those that will function as an adverb (Adv), those that will function as a adjective (Adj), and those that will function as a noun (not just OP and App, but the fundamental makeup of the patterns S, DO, IO, OC, and PN/SC).

Phrases:*
Phrases certain either a subject or a verb, but not both. The prepositional phrase--the unit Prep-OP (sometimes fleshed out with other elements)--functions as either an Adj, Adv, or a N. There are three phrase which are one of the six or nine depending on how you look at it fundamental patterns with the S severed from them. The gerund phrase is the one in which the main verb must be in the second principle part** and functions as a N. The participle phrase is the one in which the main verb must be in the second or fourth principle part** and functions as an Adj. The infinitive phrase is the one in which the verb must be in the infinitive (nearly synonymous with the first principle part** and functions as an Adj, Adv, or a N. A fifth and unusual type of phrase functions as a modifier (Adj or Adv) of the entire sentence, and is composed of a noun followed by a participial phrase.
*Sometimes the classifications of phrases are broadened to include a noun phrase, verb phrase, adjective phrase, adverb phrase, and appositive phrase. However, I will abstain from such a measure because noun phrases are just simply any of the five above which can function as a N, appositive phrases are just simply any of the five above which can function as an appositive (a N), adjective phrases are just any of the five above which can function as Adj, adverb phrases are just simply any of the five above which can function as Adv, and verb phrases are just the verb of the six fundamental patterns with its auxiliaries.
**Sometimes English verbs are depicted as having three principle parts, (1) present, (2) past, and (3) past participle, presumably because the present participle of all English verbs is the present + -ing. However, the scheme used here is that which depicts four principle parts, (1) present, (2) present participle, (3) past, (4) past participle, which can be derived from the infinitive [to . . .] by asking the four questions (1) Today, [I/we, you, he/she/it/they] . . .Currently, [I/we, you, he/she/it/they] [to be] . . . , (3) Yesterday, [I/we, you, he/she/it/they] . . . , (4) Previously, [I/we, you, he/she/it/they] [to have] . . . of the infinitive.

Re: indirect object or adverbial ?

miriam — Fri, 07 Oct 2005 08:22:04 GMT

You're most welcome, Hela. I love everything connected with English grammar, and syntactic analysis is my favourite topic!

I have A Grammar of Contemporary English and A University Grammar of English with me, so I can even give you page numbers to go with my words this time!

In A Grammar of Contemporary English you read, on page 38, that there are two types of complements: subject complement and object complement. There are examples of both and, on page 39, you have the following examples of object complement:

"They make him the chairman every year" and "they made him happier".

On the same page, you read: "A few verbs take an object complement as in #6 (this is the sentence about making someone the chairman) and these will be referred to as complex-transitive."

In A University Grammar of English you find the same definition/explanation together with the chairman example on page 14. Complex transitive verbs are mentioned again, and more examples are provided, in Ch. 12 ("The verb and its complementation"), in both books.

There is nothing about adverbials being object complements. By definition, adverbials modify either a verb or an entire clause (these are called "sentence adverbials").

I hope this helps.

Miriam

Re: The difference between a phrase and a sentence (Chris)

CalifJim — Thu, 15 Sep 2005 03:33:45 GMT

A sentence may take the form of a single clause or be formed from several clauses. The typical clause has a noun phrase for a subject and a verb phrase for a predicate. The verb phrase may have another noun phrase or two embedded within it which serves as direct object or indirect object. Noun phrases and verb phrases can also have prepositional phrases embedded within them. Adjective phrases and adverb phrases may also occur within clauses.
Clauses may be finite or non-finite. The main clause of a sentence (sometimes the only clause) has the finite form (inflected form) of a verb, so it is a finite clause. If the verb portion of a clause is not inflected for person, tense, or number, but is instead an infinitive, participle, or gerund, then it is a non-finite clause.

CJ

Re: control patterns and raising patterns

snap2 — Mon, 04 Jul 2005 17:40:26 GMT

thanks =)

@paco

I think number one and number two are IO [indirect objects]. You can't ask direct to mary.
During number three and number four you can direct ask to mary.

> 1. He believes Mary to be a spy.

believes: to think that something is true, correct or real

He thinks Mary is a spy, and in his mind he thinks he is correct on this
belief.

> 2. He prefers Mary to leave.

prefer: to like, choose or want one thing rather than another

In this case "He" would rather Mary leave than to stay.

> 3. He asked Mary to leave.
He is telling Mary to do something, in this case to leave.

> 4 He promised Mary to leave.

promise: to tell someone that you will certainly do something

He is telling Mary that he will certainly leave.

I'm very confused. =//

Grammar questions! please help!

Guest — Tue, 08 Mar 2005 04:21:04 GMT

I really need help with this grammar. It is pretty advanced. I hope you will take the time to review my question's. I know it's alot, but it is very important.

I need to know the subject, the verb (whether it is an action or linking verb), the verbs compliment (Direct Object and Indirect Object for Action verbs. Predicate Nominative or Predicate Adjective for linking verbs). If you don't know what some of those things are that's cool. Here are the sentences:

1. Our team has won a large number of awards in writing contests, and Mrs. Esmiol feels very proud of everyone for their dedication.

2. Everyone on our team is writing a research paper, but after Spring break we will begin auditions.

3. Mrs. Esmiol will give each student an opportunity during auditions for a part in the play, and we will rehearse during the foruth quarter.

4. Study your part, memorize it before the first rehearsal, and the director will give you a good grade for your efforts.

5. Have you studied the grammar concepts on this exam, or are you preparing for an extra week of tutoring?

Thanks a ton!

Re: Sentence analyze

hela — Fri, 28 Jan 2005 19:30:50 GMT

Hello everyone,

I like to do sentence analyses, so if you could sometimes send us some exercises on the matter they will be very welcome.

A/ Here is MY analysis:

1) She is so pretty a girl.

a) parts of speech:

she = nominative personal pronoun
is = fintie verb
so = adverb of intensity
pretty = predicative adjective
a = indefinite article
girl = noun

b) function:

she = subject (NP)
is = copular verb (VP)
so pretty a girl = subject-complement (?) (NP?)

2) He is too bright a student to study with me.

a) parts of speech:

he = nominative personal pronoun
is = finite verb
too = adverb of intensity
bright = predicative adjective
a = indefinite article
student = noun
to study = non-finite verb
with = preposition
me = accusative personal pronoun

b) function:

he = subject
is = copular verb
too bright a student = subject-complement (NP?)
to study with me = adverbial of purpose ??? (PP ?)

3) How smart a student he is.

a) parts of speech:

how = adverb ??
smart = attributive adjective
a = ind. art.
student = noun
he = nominative pers. pron.
is = verb

b) function:

How smart a student = subject-complement ? (NP ?)
he = subject ?
is = copula

4) In spite of his hangover, he got up at seven.

a) parts of speech:

in spite of = subordinating conjunction
his = possessive adjective
hangover = noun
he = nominative pers. pron.
got = finite verb
up = proposition
at = preposition
seven = numeral / cardinal number ?

b) function:

he = subject (NP)
got up = intransitive verb (VP)
at seven = adverbial of time (PP)
in spite of his hangover = ??

B/ What do you think of the following ?

5) She bought herself five pounds of chocolate for her birthday.

a) parts of speech:

she = subject / nominative personal pronoun
bought = ditransitive verb
herself = reflexive pronoun
five = determinative adjective / cardinal number ?
pounds = noun
of = preposition
chocolate = noun
for = preposition
her = possessive adjective
birthday = noun

b)sentence pattern:

She = subject
Bought = verb
Herself = indirect object
Five pounds of chocolate = direct object
For her birthday = adverbial of time OR adverbial of purpose ?

Thank you very much in advance for your correction.
All the best,
Hela

Re: "to" or not "to", "birthday" or "birthdays",why?

Mister Micawber — Fri, 24 Dec 2004 13:17:52 GMT

All are possible.

(1) The ones with singular 'present' are unrealistic because we would give our parents different presents each year.

(2) The ones with plural 'birthdays' are preferable to the ones with singular 'birthday' because the modifier should normally match the number of the noun, in this case 'parents'; however it is not confusing here, because it is shared knowledge that each person has one birthday per year.

(3) The 'to' can be and often is omitted when it is used to introduce the indirect object.