0
Avangi Posted 15 years ago
Grammar

Do copular verbs have indirect objects?

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.
  

Top answer

In my grammar they are indirect objects. You could also call me the object of a preposition (to) in the sentences. I think I have seen that term somewhere.

— Cool Breeze

  • In my grammar they are indirect objects.
  • You could also call me the 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?
  • ) CB
Free · every Monday

Get the Weekly English Kit 📬

New words, one handy idiom, and a 2-minute quiz — delivered to your inbox to keep your streak alive.

7 Answers
0
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?
0
0
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
0
0
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 un
0
0
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
0
0
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.
0
0
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
0
0
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
0

Related Questions