+0
Hi,

Is "me" an indirect object in any or all of these?

It sounds good to me.

It seems right to me.

To me, it's unnecessary.

It seems unnecessary to me.

Thanks, - A.
Comments  
In my grammar they are indirect objects. You could also call methe object of a preposition (to) in the sentences. I think I have seen that term somewhere. (We don't really care what label is put on a word as long as we don't die of dehydration, do we, Avangi? Emotion: beerEmotion: beer)

CB
Cool BreezeWe don't really care what label is put on a word
I once heard that as we grow older we never lose our ability to reason, but that's a lie! At least in my case I find it increasingly difficult to keep all my players in the game. I need to be able to file them away, and then know where to find them again. It was not always thus.
Anyway, labels sometimes help in this effort.

Thanks, - A.
Students: We have free audio pronunciation exercises.
Cool BreezeYou could also call me the object of a preposition (to) in the sentences.
I trust you're not suggesting that to do so would preclude their being objects.

Please give me the hammer.
Please give the hammer to me.

It's hard to argue that "to me" is not a prepositional phrase.

But I've always been under the impression that in both examples, "me" is the indirect object.

Well, first things first: Emotion: beer Emotion: beer

Best wishes, - A.
AvangiIs "me" an indirect object in any or all of these?

It sounds good to me.

It seems right to me.

To me, it's unnecessary.

It seems unnecessary to me.
What do you think of this?

http://englishplus.com/grammar/00000018.htm

CJ
CalifJimWhat do you think of this?
There must be a direct object to have an indirect object.
I think that if it's from an authoratative source, the answer to my question is "no," as a matter of definition.

Thanks. A.
Site Hint: Check out our list of pronunciation videos.
Avangiif it's from an authoratative source
Here you capture the crux of the matter. Elsewhere on this forum you have different opinions on this, some claiming that the use of the prepositional form doesn't take away the "indirect-object-ness" of the pronoun. Go figure.

In other languages the construction you originally posted about is called a "dative of interest". The poster-child example is "My dog died on me", but I think things like "... is interesting to me" also qualify for that label.

I don't recall having heard "dative of interest" used for anything in English, but then I'm getting forgetful these days, so maybe .... Emotion: smile

CJ
AvangiIs "me" an indirect object in any or all of these?

It sounds good to me.

It seems right to me.

To me, it's unnecessary.

It seems unnecessary to me.
No, on two counts: an indirect object is (usually) the recipient of a direct object "He gave the ball (direct obj) to me" (indirect obj), but there are no direct objects in your examples, and a direct object needs a transitive verb but "sound", "seem", "be" are all intransitive verbs. So, no direct object - no indirect object.

BillJ

P.S. "Sound" can sometimes be transitive, e.g. "Sound the alarm".