Re: THEORY: more questions
| From: | Paul Bennett <paul-bennett@...> |
|---|
| Date: | Tuesday, November 25, 2003, 19:44 |
|---|
On Tue, 25 Nov 2003 19:49:02 +0100, Andreas Johansson <andjo@...>
wrote:
> Quoting Paul Bennett <paul-bennett@...>:
>
>> > b.. oblique (as an aspect or mood or so)
>>
>> From Larry Trask's excellent Dictionary Of Grammatical Terms In
>> Linguistics
>> (ISBN 0415086280):
>>
>> Denoting an argument [noun] which is neither a subject nor a direct
>> object.
>> Oblique [noun]s in English are realized as objects of prepositions; in
>> some
>> other languages, they may be objects of postpositions or case-marked
>> [noun]s.
>
> That seems to leave English's indirect objects rather hanging in the
> blue?*
I don't understand. I can't think of a single indirect object in English
that isn't marked by a preposition, except for possibly ill-formed
utterances like
?give it me
for
give it to me
I don't know. I don't claim for one minute to be an expert in English
syntax. Maybe I'm merely failing to understand some aspect of your
statement that is at a more abstract technical level than I'm used to
encountering.
Paul
Replies