Contents

Introduction …………………………………………………………… 7

Chapter 1

General Presentation of the Objects in English …………………………10

Chapter 2

The Direct Object and the Direct Object Clause ………………………. 23

Chapter 3

The Indirect Object and the Indirect Object Clause …………………… 44

Chapter 4

The English Direct and Indirect Objects (Clauses) vs. the Romanian Direct

and Indirect Objects (Clauses) ………………………………………….. 61

Conclusions ……………………………………………………………. 74

Bibliography …………………………………………………………… 77

INTRODUCTION

This dissertation paper entitled A Morpho-Syntactical Approach to the English

Direct and Indirect Objects was conceived in order to clear the possible problems that may

occur in relation with the theme.

In treating these possible problems, I took into consideration the way in which they

had been presented in the English grammars from our country and not only. I also directed

my attention towards the progress made in analysing the linguistic phenomenon in general,

in Romania and other English speaking countries, but also towards the characteristic

specific to the contemporary English language that enables it to apply the rules in a flexible

and varied way according to the purpose of the communication, to the interlocutor (formal

or informal language) and the aspect of the language (written or oral).

What this paper brings new is a functional image, in general, upon the contemporary

grammatical phenomenon, by specifying both the possible exceptions to the rule and the

situations in which the grammatical forms are used: in current speech or in written

language, in the formal style or in literature, in British English or American English.

In order not to make the lecture difficult I mentioned the sources used in the end of

tha work, while within the study there were only mentioned the names of the authors and

the titles of the books.

The whole paper consists of four chapters which will be summarized in the

following paragraphs.

The first chapter of the paper, entitled General Presentation of Objects in English

has as main theme the general presentation of the objects in English. Although the whole

paper deals only with the direct and indirect objects, the prepositional object should not be

left aside as it is a source o confussions. Moreover, they should be mentioned together as

they are all secondary parts of the sentence, they belong to the nominal group and they help

the fulfilment of the meaning of certain verbs, nouns, or adjectives.

We proceded to the definitions offered by different specialized books or by

dictionaries to the English direct and indirect objects. We started from the more elaborate

definitions to end with the simpler ones, which are usually stated by dictionaries. We

7

quoted from Philip Locke and Angela Downing, A. Bantaş, Leon Leviţchi, Mark

LeTourneau, Bruce Liles and others, and we used both grammar and language dictionaries.

The two objects are discussed together in order to clarify the relation that is established

between them, that is that they most often co-exist in a sentence or clause.

Chapter two deals entirely with the English direct object and the direct object

clause. After consulting the definitions given by other grammarians, we established our

own definition that comprises mostly the information got from the definitions mentioned

above. Further in the chapter, we mentioned the formal indicators of the direct object

(namely, its position after the transitive verb and its direct relation with it and with the

accusative form of the personal pronoun as well). Concerning the ways of expressing the

direct object, we tried to offer as many possibilities as we could (thus, it can be expressed

by common or proper nouns, by pronouns, by numerals, by non-finite forms of the verbs,

by special constructions, by interjections, by a prepositional group and other groups of

words and parts of speech). The classification of the direct object follows two patterns: the

semantic value and the composition of the part of the sentence under discussion. On the

level of the sentence it is discussed the representation of the direct object, that is the direct

object clause.

Chapter three, as it was expected, was entitled The English Indirect Object and the

Indirect Object Clause. The indirect object is not as popular as the direct object is in a

sentence or clause, but we have tried to give as many ways of expressing as we found

possible. In point of classification, the indirect object is classified according to its form,

namely if it is built with or without a preposition. On the level of the sentence the indirect

object is represented by the indirect object clause, which we have established that is not

very much met especially with literary works.

And finally, chapter four named The English Direct and Indirect Objects (Clauses)

vs. the Romanian Direct and Indirect Objects (Clauses), presents a parallel between

English and Romanian in point of the occurance of the two objects the paper deals with.

Since the two languages are viewed as different but at the same time similar in many ways,

there are presented both differences and similarities regarding the theme. Most interesting

issues concern the indirect object which in Romanian can stay in the accusative case as well

8

and the indirect object clause which can be doubled in the regent clause and is introduced

differently than in English.

The paper presents a practical character, but to offer a nuance of originality I quoted

from literary works. Next to the simpler examples in which the every day language was

used, the quotations from novels and poetry render an image of the written language in

different historical periods and invite the reader to compare the types of language used.

The main object of the present course is to be a normative kind of work on

descriptive bases, furnished by the actual usage of English at present; historical information

will be given only in connection with certain grammatical facts requiring some historical

explanation; comparison with Romanian grammar will be also resorted to, for didactic

rather than strictly scientifical purposes; theoretical implications will be supplied to a

greater extent only in those cases in which the respective problems are still a matter of

controversy between grammarians; while the practical aspects of the lectures will be

represented mainly by examples, translations, classification schemes.

9

CHAPTER 1

General Presentation of the Objects in English

There can be distinguished in English three kinds of objects: Direct Objects, Indirect

Objects and Prepositional Objects.

On the level of the sentence all these objects are secondary parts of the sentence that

complete the meaning of a verb or, rarely, of noun or adjective. Like the subjects, the

objects are nominal parts of the sentence and can be expressed by much the same means as

the former.

E.g. “Paul saw in the darkness of the shop, an elegant young lady in black

peering over the counter curiously.”(D.H. Lawrence, Sons and Lovers, p. 98)

(“ Paul văzu în întunecimea magazinului, o domnişoară elegantă îmbrăcată

în negru uitându-se curioasă de după tejghea.”)

“That William promised me, when he went to London, as, he’d give me a

pound a month. He has given me ten shilings-twice (….)”.

(D.H. Lawrence, op. cit. p. 99)

(“Că William mi-a promis, când a plecat la Londra, că îmi va da o liră pe

lună. Mi-a dat câte zece şilingi de două ori….”)

“Now, Stephen, pull your chair round, and tell me what you have been

doing all this time”. (Th. Hardy, A Pair of Blue Eyes, p. 105)

(“Acum, Stephen, trage-ţi scaunul aproape, şi spune-mi ce-ai mai făcut.”)

“And remember, I don’t know much about women” (Th. Hardy, op. cit.,

p. 106)

(“Şi ţine minte, nu ştiu prea multe despre femei.”)

“I like to serve you, sir, and to obey you in all that is right.” (Charlotte

Brontë, Jane Eyre, p. 216)

10

(“Îmi place să vă servesc şi mă supun dumneavoastră în tot ceea ce este

decent.”)

“(…..) I sometimes hushed in my arms, sometimes dandled on my knee,

sometimes watched playing with daisies on a lawn.” (Charlotte Brontë, op.

cit., p. 219)

(“Câteodată tăceam în braţele mele, câteodată mă legănam pe genunchi,

câteodată priveam cum mă jucam cu margaretele pe pajişte.”)

In the examples above, the verbs, either predicative or not, need other parts of

speech to complete their meaning. Thus, nouns, pronoums, numerals, infinitives, gerunds,

phrases or entire clauses have been used in these sentences as objects to complete the

meaning of a verb. Moreover, many of these verbs cannot form a predicate with a full

meaning unless they are followed by an object.

Some objects are used to end well the mearning of nouns, or as well of adjectives:

E.g. “They’re large in promises”. (D.H.Lawrence, op. cit., p. 99)

(“Ei sunt foarte generoşi în promisiuni.”)

“Is there anything good for me? (Charles Dickens, Nicholas Nichleby,

p.270)

(“Este ceva bun şi pentru mine?”)

“He used to absorb her attention by telling her of his strange experiences in

digging up after long years the bodies of persons he had known.” (Th.

Hardy, op. cit., p. 64)

(“Obişnuia să-i atragă atenţia povestindu-i experienţe ciudate despre cum

săpa dupa mulţi ani in căutarea trupurilor persoanelor pe care le cunoscuse.”)

“My surprise at hearing the news was so great that I couldn’t even move.”

(“Uimirea mea la auzul veştilor era aşa de mare încât nu mă mai puteam nici

mişca.”)

As it was mentioned above, in English we can distinguish the following kinds of

objects:

1) Direct objects

2) Indirect objects

11

3) Prepositional objects.

If we are to compare this fact with the Romanian language we can say that there are

also other kinds called “complemente circumstanţiale”. But, in this case, in English, these

are no longer objects but they are rendered by another term, namely “adverbial modifiers”.

1) Generally corresponding to the Romanian “complement direct” is the direct

object (in the accusative or object case). It is to be noted, however, that the complex direct

object is an exception as it is rendered into Romanian by phrases or others means.

E.g. I heard her on the radio.

“I see them, boy, I see them ! (James Fenimore Cooper, The Last of

the Mohicans, p. 83)

(“Îi vad băiete, îi văd!”)

“I hadn’t seen him for a month”. (Joseph Conrad, The Secret Agent,

p. 69)

(“Nu l-am mai văzut de o lună.”)

2) Indirect Objects in English stay in the dative or object case and can be

considered equivalents of the Romanian “ complemente indirecte”. Yet, the indirect object

encounters a restriction namely that of being used after transitive verbs denoting the

conveyance of on object or abstract notion which are usually expressed by a noun or

pronoun with human features.

E.g. “Carry them to England, and show them to your king “. ( J. F.Cooper,

op. cit., p. 195)

(“ Du-le în Anglia şi aratăi-le regelui tău.”)

“Permit me to observe to you “. (Joseph Conrad, op. cit., p. 32)

(“Dă-mi voie să mă uit la tine.”)

“You dare! Well, I am going to speak plain English to you.” (Joseph

Conrad, op. cit., p. 30)

(“Îndrăzneşti! Păi atunci am să-ţi spun pe şleau.”)

3) Prepositional objects in English are formed of a noun or a noun substitute

preceded by a preposition and they are usually in the accusative case. These objects

correspond to the Romanian complements of agent, of relation, of means, the instrumental

12

and the sociative complements. It should be noted that the prepositional objects do not

render the Romanian “complemente circumstanţiale”; they are expressed by the English

“adverbial modifiers”.

E.g. “And that would detract from the especial alarming significance we wish

to give to the act”. (Joseph Conrad, op. cit., p. 35)

(“Şi acest lucru l-ar îndepărta de la semnificaţia alarmantă pe care dorim să

o dăm actului.”)

“You can’t count upon their emotions either of pity or fear for very

long”.( Joseph Conrad, op. cit., p. 35).

(“Nu te poţi baza pe sentimentele lor fie de milă, fie de frică, pentru foarte

mult timp.”)

“The plan was agreed on.”

In what concerns the definitions of the three classes of objects, they are as different

and many as the grammar books that render them.

Thus, what we found most interesting is the view that Angela Downing and Philips

Locke had on objects in their “A University Course in English Grammar”. They define the

direct object as: “The Direct Object is the single Object in a transitive clause, not mediated

by a preposition and having no prepositional paraphrase. In clauses with two objects, it

follows the Indirect Object (‘Send them a telegram’). It can become Subject in a passive

clause (‘The telegram was sent’). It represents a wide variety of semantic roles. Typically,

the Direct Object is realised by Nominal Groups expressing entities; less typically by other

classes of unit.” (p. 41)

Their definition comprises, nevertheless, all the information that one should have

about the direct object, but it can also be considered too much for a definition.

Another definition that can be considered more complete than others is the one

offered by Andrei Bantaş in “Elements of Descriptive English Syntax”. He states that:

“The direct object is a secondary part of the sentence indicating the person, thing or

abstract notion that directly receives, suffers or attracts the action of a transitive verb

(simple or complex) as well as of a transitive verbal phrase. The direct object always stands

in the accusative case. It answers the questions whom? or what ? ”.

13

E.g. “What did you think?” ( Andrei Bantaş, op. cit., p. 112) 

(,,Ce ai crezut ?“)

“I never heard anything like this. “(Ibid., p. 112);

(“N-am auzit niciodată aşa ceva.”)

Leon Leviţchi and Ioan Preda, in “Gramatica limbii engleze”, come with another

definition of the direct object placing on a higher level the relation of the direct object with

the verb.

“The direct object determines a transitive verb with the syntactic function of

predicate and usally designates the objects or the result of the action expressed by the

predicate”. (Leon Leviţchi, Ioan Preda, op. cit., p. 235)

E.g. “You surprise me!”(p. 235)

(“Mă uimeşti!”)

“He slammed the door.” (p. 235)

(“A trântit uşa.”)

“They had built a house”. (p. 235)

(“Ei construiseră o casă.”)

Yet, they complete their statement by saying that this distinction is not exclusive as

there may be other logical and semantic relations between the direct object and the

transitive verb (it can be the instrument or the cause expressed by the verb).

E.g. “He shook his head.” (p.235)

(“A clătinat din cap.”)

“He dreaded going there”. (p.235)

(“Îi era groază să se ducă acolo.”)

Another grammarian that points at the relation of the direct object with a transitive

verb is Mark S. LeTourneau, in his definition of the direct object, in “English Grammar”.

“A direct object (DO) is the obligatory NP complement of a transitive verb. If a

transitive verb takes only one complement, it will be a direct object. Transitive verbs and

their objects can be identified by various syntactic and semantic properties.” (p. 144)

The syntactic properties he is talking about point to the fact that transitive verbs

differ as to whether their direct objects must be overt. Thus , in the sentence “Fire

14

consumed the buiding” (p. 144), the verb “consumed” is obligatory transitive as it can not

make sense if it is used without a direct object ”Focul a mistuit clădirea”.

On the other hand , in the sentences:

“Please eat before you go”. (p. 144)

(“Te rog mănâncă înainte să pleci.”)

“Eat your vegetables “.(p.144)

(“Mănâncă-ţi legumele!”)

The verb “eat” can occur with or without a direct object and it is optionally

transitive.

As the semantic properties of Direct Objects are concerned, a transitive verb and its

direct object generally enter into one of three sematic relations:

1. undergoing an action or event

E.g. “The fishermen are painting the boat and mending their nets”. (p.144)

(“ Pescarii îşi vopsesc barca şi-şi repară năvoadele.”)

2. resulting from an action

E.g. “We baked a cake”. (p.145)

(“Noi am făcut o prăjitură”.)

3. producing the state denoted by the verb

E.g. “Some connoisseurs dislike spicy food”.(p.145)

(“Unii experţi nu agrează mâncarea condimentată”.)

Little by little we get to simpler definitions of a direct object leaving behind the

most elaborate ones.

Bruce L. Liles in “A Basic Grammar of Modern English” simply states that: “The

direct object is sometimes defined as the receiver of the action or the person or thing

directly affected by it.”

E.g. “Tom chased me”. (p.9)

(“Tom m-a urmărit”)

“The teacher slapped the student”. (p.9)

(“Profesorul l-a pălmuit pe elev”.)

15

However, he cannot help completing his definition by mentioning that there are

sentences in which the object neither receives an action nor is affected is any way.

E.g. “Charles missed the plane.” (p.9)

(“Charles a pierdut avionul.”)

“The moths ate a hole in my coat.“ (p.9)

(“Moliile mi-au făcut o gaură în haină.”)

Another definition is offerd by Inna Marinescu and Janina Radu in “Compendiu de

gramatică a limbii engleze”.

“The direct object designates the person or thing over which the action expressed by

the transitive verb passes. It answers the questions ”Whom?” or “What?” (p.112)

E.g. “He met a friend”. (p. 112)

(“El a întâlnit un prieten.”)

”The pilot started the engine.” (p. 112)

(“Pilotul a pornit motorul.”)

Finally, we come to the definitions given by dictionaries, be them grammar

dictionaries or simply lanuguage dictionaries.

Grigore Vereş in his “A Dictionary of English Grammar”, when he speaks about the

term “object” he refers to the direct object counting on the fact that direc objects are the

ones that occur most frequently after verbs.

“The grammatical object receives the action of a transitive verb (active). Noun

phrases immediately following transitive verbs that are only capable of taking one object

are usually direct objects.” (p.268)

E.g. “Pamela likes chocolates.” (p. 268)

(“Pamelei îi plac bomboanele de ciocolată.”)

Moreover, the direct object names the person or thing affected by the action of the

verb:

E.g. “We congratulated the winner.” (p.127)

(“Noi l-am felicitat pe învingător.”)

The direct object is a noun phrase or a nominal clause:

E.g. “We received numerous complaints.” (p.127)

16

(“Am primit foarte multe plângeri.”)

“I’ve said what I had to say.” (p.127)

(“Am spus ce trebuia să spun.”)

Another dictionary definition that equates in a way the term object, in general, with

the direct object is the definition given in “Collins Cobuild English Usage”:

“The object of a verb or clause is a noun group which refers to the person or thing

that is involved in an action but does not perform the action. The object comes after the

verb. It is sometimes called the direct object. “(p.461)

E.g. “He closed the door.” (p. 461)

(“El a închis uşa.”)

“It was dark by the time they reached their house.” (p.461)

(“Era întuneric când au ajuns acasă.”)

Instead the definition of the object proposed by the “Oxford Advanced Learner’s

Dictionary” includes the direct, the indirect and the propositional object.

Thus, “a noun, or a phrase or clause behaving like a noun, which refers to a person,

thing, etc affected by the action of a verb, or which depends on a preposition” is called

object. (p.797)

E.g. “He took the money.” (p.797)

(“El a luat banii.”)

“He took what he wanted.”(p.797)

(“El a luat ce a vrut.”)

“I gave him the money. “ (p.797)

(“I-am dat banii.”)

The direct object is “a noun, pronoun, noun phrase or noun clause which is directly

affected by the action of a verb.” (p.326)

The other object that has a strong relation with the direct object is the indirect

object.

First of all, we must have a look on the definitions offered to the indirect object by

various grammarians.

17

The definition rendered by Angela Downing and Philip Locke is as interesting as

that given to the direct object.

“The Indirect Object is that clause constituent which immediately follows the

Predicator in clauses with two Objects (“Send them a telegram”). It can become Subject in

a passive clause (“They were sent a telegram”) and has a prepositional paraphrase (“A

telegram was sent to them”). It is associated with the Recipient and Beneficiary roles. It is

realised by Nominal Groups and nominal relative clauses.” (p.41)

Andrei Bantaş states that the indirect object is usually employed together with the

direct one but he does not fail to admit that there are also cases when the indirect object can

occur without the direct one, the latter being generally implied.

His definition is the following:

“The indirect object is that secondary part of the sentence witch complets the

mearning of a verb, indicating the person (or sometimes the thing or abstract notion) whom

(or witch) the action of that verb affects/ influences/reaches indirectly.There for it shows

the person, (more rarely) the thing / the concept indirectly receiving the action of the verb,

benefiting by that action or being destined to receive the object of the action.” (p.134)

E.g. “I will give your request my most favourable consideration.” (p.134)

(“Voi acorda cea mai favorabilă consideraţie rugăminţii tale.”)

“And that was the worst that would’ve happened to him. “ (Joseph Conrad,

op. cit., p. 173)

(“Şi asta ar fi fost cel mai rău lucru care i s-ar fi putut întâmpla dacă……”)

“For the dunce has omitted to tell me this.“ (James F. Cooper, op. cit., p.178)

(“Pentru că acest cap-sec a omis să-mi spună asta.”)

Leon Leviţchi and Ioan Preda view the indirect object in another way, having a

strong relation with the verb and being placed on the same level with the direct object.

“The indirect object, an objective determiner of the predicate (just like the direct

one), indicates the person (more rarely the thing) to whom the action or its direct object is

destined and it is usually expressed by a noun or a pronoun in the dative case or by an

indirect object clause.” (p.239)

E.g. “These books belonged to my father.” (p.239)

18

(“Aceste cărţi îi aparţineau tatălui meu.”)

“Silence answered her.“ (Charlotte Brontë, Villette, p.16)

(“I s-a răspuns cu tăcere.”)

“Mrs. Hughes talked to me a great deal about the family.” (Jane Austen ,

“Northanger Abbey”, p.561)

(“Doamna Hughes mi-a vorbit foarte mult despre această familie.”)

Mark S. LeTourneau in his “English Grammar” makes a first distinction between

indirect and direct objects.

He states that: “An indirect object (IO) is the normally optional NP complement of a

transitive verb. Semantically, an indirect object denotes the person who either receives the

thing denoted by the direct object, benefits from the action performed on the direct object,

or both.”(p.147)

E.g. “President Kennedy awarded Alan Shepherd a medal as the first American

in space.”(p.147)

(“Preşedintele Kennedy i-a acordat lui Alan Shepherd medalia de primul

american în spaţiu.”)

“The governor did not grant the prisoner a reprieve.”(p.147)

(“Guvernatorul nu i-a acordat prizonierului o suspendare.”)

As we have already mentioned LeTourneau also offers some arguments that

distinguish direct from indirect objects. He speaks about two properties: a syntactic and a

semantic property. The first property (the syntactic one) is that the indirect object is the first

postverbal nominal phrase, and the direct object the second. The semantic property is that

indirect objects are usually persons or higher animals, whereas direct objects, when they

occur with indirect objects, are often neither.

He also has an explanation for this fact and that is that “recipients must normally be

sentient beings, and what they receive must be things.” (p.147)

Bruce L. Liles offers a simpler definition and he also demonstrates the occurance of

the indirect object. “The traditional definition of the indirect object as the one to whom or

for whom the action is performed is usually fairly accurate.” (p.19)

E.g. “Edgar threw the ball to Mike.” (p.18)

19

(“Edgar i-a aruncat mingea lui Mike.”)

In this sentence we recognize “Edgar” as the subject, “threw” as the verb, “the ball”

as the direct object, and “to Mike” as a prepositional phrase functioning as an adverbial of

direction.

If we are to take into consideration LeTourneau’s property, that the indirect object

comes immediately after the predicate, and we move the prepositional phrase before the

direct object, the result would be inaccurate.

E.g. “Edgar threw to Mike the ball.”

But Liles suggests deleting the preposition and producing an acceptable sentence.

E.g. “Edgar threw Mike the ball.”

And thus we come to what is known as the indirect object.

Another definition that is rendered by Inna Marinescu and Janina Radu in Romanian

describes the indirect objects as follows:

“The indirect object indicates the person and, more rarely, the thing towards whom

or which the action of the verb is directed.” (p.114)

They complete their definition by explaining that this type of object occurs after

“transmission” verbs. This last term used by the two grammarians refers in fact to the class

of verbs that enable us to identify both the speaker and the receiver and the transmitted

object.

They say: “For example, in the case of the verb GIVE, we can indicate ‘the giver’,

‘the object given’, ‘the receiver’:”(p.114)

E.g. “ She gave a new expression to that idea.”

(“I-a dat o nouă interpretare acelei idei.”)

“Give me the dictionary, please.” (p.115)

(“Dă-mi te rog dicţionarul.”)

As in the case of the direct object, it is important to find the definitions given to the

indirect object by dictionaries.

“A dictionary of English Grammar” by Grigore Vereş states some features of the

indirect object exemplifying them accordingly.

The indirect object is a noun phrase or a nominal relative clause:

20

E.g. “Please forward the letter to the sales manager.”

(“Te rog înmânează-i scrisoarea directorului de vânzări.”)

“ The mariner was doomed to tell whower he met his story.”

(“Marinarul era blestemat să spună oricui întâlnea în cale povestea sa.”)

The indirect object often names the receiver of the action:

E.g. “Give him the book.”

(“Dă-i cartea.”)

The indirect object always precedes the direct object. It only goes after the direct

object if we change it into a phrase beginning with ‘to’ or ‘for’:

E.g. “I brought Peter the mower. I brought the mower to Peter.”

(“I-am adus lui Petre coasa. I-am adus coasa lui Petre.”)

“I brought a mower for grandpa.”

(“Am adus o coasă pentru bunicul.”)

Indirect objects, like direct objects, can become the subject of a passive:

E.g. “Peter was brought the mower.” (p.203)

(“Lui Petre i s-a adus coasa.”)

Other dictionary definition is given by “Collins Cobuild English Usage”:

“Some verbs have two objects. For example in the sentence ‘I gave John the book’,

‘the book’ is the direct object and ‘John’ is the indirect object. The indirect object usually

refers to the person who benefits from an action or receives somethnig as a result of it. You

can put an indirect object in front of the direct object or in a prepositional phrase after the

direct object.” (p.462)

E.g. “Dad gave me a car.” (p.462)

(“Tata mi-a dăruit o maşină.”)

“He handed his room key to the receptionist.” (p.462)

(“El i-a dat recepţionerului cheia de la cameră.”)

We finally get to the definition given to the indirect object by a language dictionary,

namely the “Oxford Advanced Learner’s Dictionary”: “indirect object n (grammar) an

additional noun, noun phrase or pronoun used after certain verbs which refers to the person

or thing that an action is done to or for, e.g. ‘him’ in ‘Give him (ie. to him) the money’.”

21

After synthesizing the various definitions given by different grammarians to the two

parts of the sentence the paper deals with, one can easily notice that the two objects are

interrelated and we cannot analyse one of them without mentioning the other. Usually, most

of the sentences that contain a direct object include an indirect object as well. That is the

two objects must be discussed together and not separately.

22

CHAPTER 2

The Direct Object and the Direct Object Clause

Definition

The Direct Object is that secondary part of the sentence which indicates the person,

the thing or the abstract notion to whom/ which the action of a transitive verb is directly

associated. It answers the questions ‘whom?’ (“pe cine?”) or ‘what?’ (“ce?”) and represents

the element which receives or suffers the production or result (the ocurance, the product,

the effect or the object) of an action.

E.g. “I do not understand you.”(Jane Austen, Northanger Abbey, p.118)

(“Nu te înţeleg”.)

“The she-wolf had by now developed a ferocious temper. “ (Jack London,

White Fang, p.33)

(“Lupoaica îşi dezvoltase deja un comportament feroce.”)

 “I saw something. “ (Charlotte Brontë , Villette, p.229)

(“Am văzut ceva.”)

“Say what you will reader-tell me I was nervous, or mad.” (Charlotte

Brontë, op.cit., p.229)

(“Spune ce vrei, cititorule-spune-mi că am fost emoţionată sau supărată.’’)

It is important to say a few words about the relation between the direct object and

verbs.

First we must make the difference between transitive and intransitive verbs.

Transitive verbs are those verbs that are used with a direct object either expressed or

understood or as Bantaş would say “those verbs whose action is immediately directed

towards a direct object in the accusative.” (Andrei Bantaş, “Elements of English Syntax”,

p.113)

23

Intransitive verbs are those verbs that are not used with an object and they differ

from transitive verbs in their possibility to form predicates by themselves which transitive

ones cannot do.

So far, everything seems clear and we can conclude that direct objects can be used

only with transitive verbs.

But what happens when two languages are compared, in our case English and

Romanian, when the direct object is not identical in the two languages because not all

Romanian transitive verbs are transitive in English, as well.

For instance, let’s compare the following two sentences:

1. Ai ascultat cântecul Shakirei?

2. Did you listen to Shakira’s song?

In the first sentence the verb is transitive followed by the direct object “cântecul”.

While in the second sentence (the English one) the verb is not followed by a direct object.

A very frequent case is that of the verb “to like” which in English follows the

pattern of the transitive verb “somebody likes something”, in Romanian is rendered by

constructions with the dative case:

E.g. “They all liked her very much.”

(“ Tuturor le-a plăcut foarte mult de ea.”)

Another issue regarding this point is that of the transitive verbs with two direct

objects.

There are a few verbs: “to ask” (“a întreba”), “to lead” (a duce”), “to teach” (“a

preda”) that can be followed by two direct objects, the first designating a person and the

second a thing:

E.g. “They asked him a question.”

(“Ei i-au pus o întrebare.”)

“The teacher taught us the passive voice.”

(“Profesorul ne-a predat diateza pasivă.”)

The passive constructions with two direct objects have two passive transformations.

The first one and the most frequent one is that when the direct object that designates the

24

person becomes the subject of the passive sentence and the direct object designating the

thing is retained.

E.g. “He was asked a question.”

(“Lui i-a fost pusă o întrebare.”)

“We were taught the passive voice.”

(“ Nouă ni s-a predat diateza pasivă.”)

In the second transformation, very seldom used, the direct object that designates the

thing becomes the subject of the passive sentence and the direct object designating the

person is retained.

E.g. “A question was asked him by them.”

(“O întrebare i-a fost pusă lui de ei.”)

“The passive voice was taught to us by the teacher.”

(“Diateza pasivă ne-a fost predată de către profesor.’’)

Mark S. LeTourneau gives a few examples when even intransitive verbs can occur

with nominal phrase complements but he counts on the fact that these complements have

the function of completing the meaning of the intransitive verbs.

Thus, we cannot grammatically say: “*The lifeguard swam the tide” (p.142),

(“*Salvamarul a înotat valul.”), but we can say “The lifeguard swam the entire length of the

pool”. (p.142), (“Salvamarul a inotat o intreaga lungime de bazin.”)

Other examples:

“In 1492, Columbus sailed the ocean blue.” (p.142)

(“În 1492, Columb a navigat pe oceanul albastru.”)

“The children went home.” (p.142)

(“Copiii s-au dus acasă.”)

“The Girl Scouts hiked a mile.” (p.142)

(“Fetele cercetaş au făcut o drumeţie de o milă.”)

But, the author himself admits that the underlined words answer other questions

than those of the direct object, namely the questions the adverbials answer. Therefore, they

cannot function as direct objects.

25

Syntactic and Semantic Features of the Direct Object

To function as a direct Object (OD), a word phrase or clause must fulfil the

following syntactic criteria:

(1) To be placed immediately after the predicator;

(2) In a passive clause the Direct Object should typically become Subject;

(3) After passivisation, the meaning stays the same.

E.g. “The police have identified the victim.”

“The victim has been identified by the police.”

“Jane hurt his feelings.”

“His feelings were hurt.”

OBSERVATION

The following sentences have no passive counterparts:

Mary hurt herself -*Herself was hurt by Mary.

Father waved his hand.-*His hand was waved by father.

Yet, “herself” and “his hand”are considered Direct Objects.

(4) When a clause contains two objects, a direct object and an indirect object, the

former is placed after the latter.

E.g. “Everybody sent her cards on her birthday. “ io od

“The librarian lent the student some books.”io od

(5) No prepositional paraphrase is possible for the Direct Object.

Semantic features

The Direct Object can be associated with a wide variety of semantic roles:

(1) Affected object (a participant, animate or inanimate, which does not cause the

happening denoted by the verb, but is directly involved in some other way).

E.g. “He headed the ball into the net.”

(“El a băgat mingea în coş.”)

“Many MP’s criticized the Prime Minister.” (Quirk, Greenbaum, “A

University Grammar of English”, p.171)

(“Mulţi parlamentari l-au criticat pe primul-ministru.”)

26

(2) Effected object (refers to something which exists only by virtue of the activity

indicated by the verb)

E.g. “She writes children’s poems.”

(“Ea scrie poezii pentru copii.”)

“Baird invented television.” (Quirk , Greenbaum, op. cit., p.174)

(“Baird a inventat televizorul.”)

(3) Instrument object (expresses the object with which the action denoted by the

verb is realized)

E.g. “The thieves used an acetylene lamp to break open the safe.”

(“Hoţii au folosit o lampă cu acetilenă pentru a sparge seiful.”)

(4) Phenomenon object (expresses a phenomenon that results from the action

performed by the verb).

E.g. “I felt a sudden pain in my arm.”

(“Am simţit deodată o durere la braţ.”)

(5) Range object (also called “cognate”, repeats partially or wholly, the meaning of

the verb).

E.g. “We sang songs round the camp fire.”

(“Am cântat cântece în jurul focului de tabără.”)

“She dreamed a beautiful dream.”

(“Ea a avut un vis frumos.”)

Formal Markers of the Direct Object

There are a few indicators that are specific to a certain part of the sentence, in our

case the direct object.

(1) The immediate position of the direct object after the transitive verb

E.g. “ I enjoyed the party very much.”

(“Mi-a plăcut petrecerea foarte mult.”)

(2) Its direct grammatical relationship with the transitive verb it determines or its

direct relation with the accusative form of the personal pronoun ( with the exception of

“it”), as well as the special accusative form of the relative-interrogative pronoun “who”,

that is “whom”.

27

E.g. “I do not suspect him of pride.”(Jane Austen, Northanger Abbey, p.115)

(“Nu-l suspectez de mândrie.”)

« Whom are you going to call ?”

(“Pe cine ai de gând să suni?”)

OBSERVATION:

Yet, some grammarians say that these markers are relative since “him” “is both an

accusative form and a dative form. “Whom” in questions often takes the form “who” in the

accusative.

Ways of Expressing the Direct Object

Since it belongs to the sphere of Nomina, just as the subject, the direct object can be

expressed by similar grammatical elements. The same can be applied to the prepositional

object also. Thus, the direct object can be expressed:

(1) By a common or verbal noun, with or without an article, by a proper name.

E.g. “I shall give you letters of introduction to all the people I know there.”

(Saki, The Open Window, quoted from Bantaş, Clonţea, Brânzeu, Manual de

literatură Engleză şi Americană, p.147)

(“O să dau scrisori de introducere tuturor persoanelor pe care le cunosc

acolo.”)

“I don’t see the joke.” (Andrei Bantaş, op. cit., p.116)

(“Nu înţeleg gluma.”)

“It saves working.”( Andrei Bantaş, op. cit., p.116)

(“Economiseşte munca.”)

“I grieve to leave Thornfield; I love Thornfield.” (Charlotte Brontë, Jane

Eyre, p. 281)

(“Nu vreau să părăsesc Thornfield-ul; eu iubesc Thornfield-ul.”)

“Who knows Latin?” (Joseph Conrad, op. cit., p.29)

(“Cine ştie Latina?”)

(2) By a pronoun

E.g. “I hope Vera has been amusing you.” (Saki, The Open Window, quoted

from op. cit., p.148)

(“Sper ca Vera să te fi amuzat.”)

28

“Mr. Doyle uses it as a paper-weight.” (Andrei Bantaş, op. cit., p.116)

(“D-l Doyle îl foloseşte drept suport pentru hârtii.”)

“Why don’t you do something   ?” (J. Conrad, op. cit., p.31)

(“De ce nu faci ceva?”)

“He didn’t do anything. “ (Andrei Bantaş, op. cit., p.116)

(“El n-a făcut nimic.”)

(3) By the anticipatory pronoun it in structures in which the direct object is realised

by a finite or non-finite clause:

E.g. “ I find it strange that he refuses to come.”

(“Găsesc ciudat faptul că refuză să vină.”)

She might regard it insulting for you to leave now.

(“Ar putea-o privi ca pe o insultă plecarea ta acum.”)

You must find it flattering having so many fans.

(“ Cred că ţi se pare flatant să ai atâţia fani.”)

(4) By a numeral

E.g. “Another hand: ‘Can you one?’ inquired the old lady.”(Ch. Dickens, The

Pickwick Papers, p.143)

(“Altă mână: Mai poţi una? Se interesă bătrâna.”)

“I offered him four, but he only took two.”(A. Bantaş, op. cit., p.116)

“We received the news of their safe arrival, and perhaps another letter, or

perhaps two.” (Ch.Dickens, A Tale of Two Cities, p.184)

(“Am primit ştiri despre sosirea lor în siguranţă şi probabil o altă scrisoare ,

sau poate două.”)

(5) By a prepositional group (of time or place)

E.g. I would prefer before noon for a meeting.

(“ Aş prefera înainte de prânz pentru o întâlnire.”)

Don’t choose by a swamp for a picnic.

(“Să nu alegeţi vecinătatea unei mlaştine pentru picnic.”)

(6) By an Infinitive or an Infinitival phrase.

Eg: “I want to remain true to myself.” (Newsweek, March 17,1997,p.43)

29

(“Vreau să rămân loial mie însumi.”)

“Don’t you want to see your country again?” (A. Bantaş, op. cit., p.116)

(“Nu vrei să-ţi revezi ţara?”)

“Give him to drink, my wife!” (Ch. Dickens, A Tale of Two Cities, p.168)

(“Nevastă, dă-i ceva de băut!”)

“Knight had looked on his love so sceptically that it would not do to say all

that he had to say by any means.”(Th. Hardy, A Pair of Blue Eyes, p.107)

(“Knight o privise pe iubita lui atât de sceptic încât n-a îndrăznit să mai

spună nimic din ce avea să-i spună cu orice preţ.”)

(7) By a Gerund or a Gerundial phrase.

E.g. “He hated going ashore, anyhow.”(J. Conrad, Typhoon, p.51)

(“Oricum, ura să tragă la ţărm.”)

“I like riding a bicycle”.

“I remember being terribly upset once up the river.” (J. K. Jerome, Three

Men in a Boat, quoted from Leon Leviţchi, Curs de morfologia limbii

engleze, p.268)

(“Mi-amintesc că eram teribil de supărat odată când eram pe râu.”)

“I enjoyed going there.”(L. Leviţchi, Curs de morfologia limbii engleze,

p.271)

(“Mi-a făcut plăcere să merg acolo.”)

(8) By a special construction:

a) The Accusative with the Infinitive

E.g. “I wants to make your flesh creep, replied the boy.”(Ch. Dickens, The

Pickwick Papers, p.180)

(“Vreau să ţi se facă pielea de găină, a răspuns băiatul.”)

“Celia had wanted him to stay.”(P. Abrahams, The Path of Tunder, quoted

from L. Leviţchi, op. cit., p.254)

(“Celia dorise ca el să rămână.”)

“I mean you to do it.”(L. Leviţchi, op. cit., p.254)

(“Vreau ca tu să faci asta.”)

30

b) The Accusative with the Present Participle

E.g. “(…)and then he heard the heels of the fat boy’s boots crunching the gravel, as he

retired and left the old lady alone.” (Ch. Dickens ,The Pickwick Papers, p.180)

(“…şi apoi a auzit tocurile de la cizmele băiatului cel gras scârţâind pe pietriş

după ce se retrăsese şi o lăsase pe bătrână singură.”)

“I found him sleeping.” (L. Leviţchi, op. cit., p.265)

(“L-am văzut venind.”)

“I appreciate your coming here.”

(“Apreciez că ai venit aici.”)

(9) By a whole subordinate object clause

E.g. “You know what a horse is.”(Ch. Dickens, Hard Times, p.50)

(“Ştii ce e acela un cal.”)

“What will I do if he decides to go down, I don’t know.”(A.Bantaş, op. cit.,

p.117)

(“Ce vei face dacă se hotărăşte să coboare, nu ştiu.”)

“I only ask what I want to be told.”(Jane Austen, Northanger Abbey, p.136)

(“Nu întreb decât ce vreau să mi se răspundă.”)

(10) By a group of words

E.g. “He said, ‘ Farewell! ’ said a last ‘God bless you!’ and left her.” ( Ch.

Dickens, A Tale of Two Cities, p. 156)

(“Îi spuse rămas bun, un ultim Dumnezeu să te binecuvânteze şi o părăsi.”)

“You won’t be able to adopt the I- didn’t –know-anything-about-it-

attitude.”(A. Bantaş, op. cit., p.117)

(“Nu vei putea lua atitudinea de n-am ştiut nimic.”)

“They say Farewell, or any form they prefer.”(Ch. Brontë, Jane Eyre,

p.254)

(“Ei spun “cu bine” sau orice altă formă preferă.”)

(11) By an interjection

E.g. “The position appeared by no means to please him, however with an

increasing rabble surrounding the coach, deriding him, making grimaces at

31

him, and incessantly groaning and calling out: ‘ Yah! Spies! Tst! Yaha!

Spies!’ with many complements too numerous and forcible to repeat.” ( Ch.

Dickens, A Tale of Two Cities, p. 156)

(“Totuşi părea că îl mulţumeşte această poziţie, cu o gloată ce se mărea şi

înconjura trăsura râzând de el, strâmbându-se la el, gemând şi strigând fără

încetare: ‚Ha! Spionii! St! Ha, ha! Spionii!’, şi multe alte complimente, prea

numeroase şi prea grele pentru a le putea repeta.”

(12) By any part of speech

E.g. “Saying which, the old lady drew herself up.” (Ch.Dickens, The Pickwick

Papers, p.141)

(“Spunând care, bătrâna se retrase.”)

“Say half-and-half.”(A. Bantaş, op. cit., p.116)

(“Spune jumate-jumate.”)

Classification of Direct object

Direct objects, like other parts of the sentence, can be classified in terms of:

A. Their semantic value (in point of their content or force)

B. Their composition (in point of their structure)

A. As it concerns their semantic content, direct objects can be further classified into:

(1) Meaningful or significant, that is they have a full lexical value, and they are the

usual or common kinds of direct objects

E.g. “Argentina has rediscovered the attack.”(Newsweek, July 4, 1994, p.1)

(“Argentina a redescoperit atacul.”)

“Students play a vital role in the democratic youth movement.”(A.Bantaş,

op. cit., p.117)

(“Studenţii au un rol vital pentru mişcarea democrată tânără.”)

“The family, after having been thus occupied for a short time, extinguished

their lights and retired, as I conjectured, to rest.”(Mary Shelley,

Frankenstein, p.105)

(“Familia, după ce fuseseră astfel ocupaţi pentru un scurt timp, au stins

luminile şi s-au retras, după cum mă aşteptam, să se odihnească.”)

32

(2) Meaningless, non-significant, impersonal or formal direct objects. This kind of

object is represented by the impersonal pronoun “it” in constructions in which it has no

semantic value.

E.g. “And he had it in charge from high authority to bring about the great

public-office Millenium.”(Ch. Dickens, Hard Times, p.50)

(“Şi i se dăduse în grijă de către înalta autoritate să înfiinţeze marele birou

Millenium.”)

In such infinitival constructions the formal direct object represented by the pronoun

“it” can also be called introductory direct object as it anticipates the direct object expressed

by the respective infinitive form. It can be used after verbs like: “to consider” (a considera),

“to count” (a socoti), “to find” (a găsi), “to leave” (a lăsa), “to owe” (a datora), “to think” (a

considera). In what the constructions, in which “it” can be used, are concerned, they are of

two types:

a) with an indirect object

E.g. “You owe it to yourself to make the best of your abilities.”(L. Leviţchi,

I. Preda, Gramatica limbii engleze, p.253)

(“Eşti dator faţă de tine însuţi să-ţi pui în valoare cât mai mult calităţile.”)

b) with a predicative adjunct expressed either by a noun or an adjective

E.g. “He considered it his duty to act like that.”(L. Leviţchi, I. Preda, op. cit.,

p.253)

(“Considera că este de datoria lui să procedeze aşa.”)

‘”I find it hard to put up with her whims.” (L. Leviţchi, I. Preda, op.

cit.,p.253)

(“Îmi este greu să mă împac cu mofturile ei.”)

In “Gramatica limbii engleze”, Leon Leviţchi suggests another value of the pronoun

“it”, that is an anaphorical one, and states that “it” is used as a formal direct object in

idiomatic constructions accompanying different verbs like:”to carry it” (a învinge),”to do

it” (a o face), “to catch it” (a o păţi), “to over do it” (a întrece măsura),”to fight it”( a lupta

până la capăt), “to lord it” (a face pe stăpânul), “to foot it”-fam. (a merge pe jos). In such

33

constructions, “it” has the same function as “o” in the Romanian expressions: “a o face de

oaie”, “a o încasa”, etc.

(3) Cognate or internal direct objects accompany in the sentence verbs which are

normally intransitive of the type: “to sleep” (a dormi), “to dream” (a visa), “to live” (a trăi),

“to laugh” (a râde), “to cry” (a plânge), “to dress” (a (se) îmbrăca), “to die’ (a muri), “to

fight” (a lupta). Usually these verbs do not take a direct object after them and they are

called cognate because the nouns which express them are in most cases related semantically

and etymologically to the respective verb.

It differs from the common direct object in the following aspects:

a) The verb whose meaning it completes is intransitive.

b) This verb cannot be accompanied by other noun with the syntactic function of direct

object; for example, the verb “to laugh” can be followed only by the nouns “laugh” or

“laughter”, the verb “to dream” only by the noun “dream”. Other nouns or pronouns can be

used only as prepositional objects.

c) The internal object mostly plays the role of an adverbial modifier with intensifying

value.

E.g. “He then laughed his most horrible laugh.”(Oscar Wilde, The Canterville

Ghost, quoted from A.Bantaş, op. cit., p.118)

(“Apoi a râs cât mai oribil cu putinţă.”)

In this example, the construction could be transformed into “he laughed most

horribly”, but the cognate direct object is used as a stylistic device to add a greater force to

the utterance.

E.g “Mr. Rochester, if ever I did a good deed in my life - if ever I thought a

good thought - if I prayed a sincere and blameless prayer – if ever I wished a

righteous wish – I am rewarded now.” (Ch. Brontë, Jane Eyre, p. 470)

(“ Domnule Rochester, dacă vreodată am făcut vreo faptă bună în viaţa mea,

dacă am avut vreodată vreun gând bun, dacă am rostit vreo rugăciune sinceră

şi nevinovată, dacă am avut vreo dorinţă cinstită, sunt răsplătită acum pentru

toate.”)

B. In point of composition or structure direct objects can be classified:

34

(1) Simple objects are expressed by a single word that can be accompanied by

determiners or modified by an attribute or even an attributive clause

E.g. “President Suharto has built his vast and diverse country into a major

Southeast Asian power.”(Newsweek, July4, 1994, p.1)

(“Preşedintele Suharto şi-a transformat marea şi diversificata sa ţară într-o

putere majoră a Asiei de sud-est.”)

 “Campbell buried his face in his hands.” (Oscar Wilde, The Picture of

Dorian Gray, p.84).

(“Campbell şi-a afundat faţa în palme.”)

“This old person tore his paper and broke several things with his

cane.”(A. Bantaş, op. cit., p.119)

(“Acest bătrân i-a rupt ziarul şi a spart câteva lucruri cu bastonul.”)

“Every body is so surprized; and every body says the same obliging things.”

(Jane Austen, Emma, p.119)

(“Toată lumea este aşa surprinsă; şi toată lumea spune aceleaşi lucruri care

se cuvin.”)

“As people finally realize the true effects of policies that destroy character

and individual responsability, they will demand the significant changes that

are needed.” (Newsweek, July4, 1994, p.4)

(“Imediat ce oamenii vor realiza adevăratele efecte ale politicii care distrug

personalitatea şi responsabilitatea individuală, ei vor cere schimbările majore

care sunt necesare.”)

(2) Coordinated objects are represented by two or several nouns or noun

equivalents in the accusative case either connected by conjunctions or asyndetically and

which determine the same transitive verb.

E.g. “Framton grabbed wildly at his stick and hat, hardly noticing the hall-door

and the front gate in his headlong retreat.” (Saki, The Open Window,

quoted from Bantaş, Clonţea, Brânzeu, op. cit., p.148)

(“Framton s-a repezit la baston şi pălărie, observând cu greu uşa din hol şi

poarta principală în retragerea lui pripită.”)

35

“She had an ample house and garden.” (Jane Austen, Emma, p.18)

(“Ea avea o casă şi o grădina destul de mari.’)

“Wherefore, Bees of England, forge

Mary a weapon, chain and scourge

That these stingless drones may spoil

The forced produce of your toil?”

(P. B. Shelley, Song to the Men of England, quoted from A. Bantaş,

op.cit.,p.119)

(“Arme, biciuri făuriţi

Ca albinele trudiţi

C-acei trântori îmbuibaţi

Să ia tot ce adunaţi?”)

(3) Compound objects are expressed by two coordinated words that refer to the

same object, person or abstract notion.

E.g. “I should think, to have observed many scenes and incidents worth

recording.” (Ch. Dickens, The Pickwick Papers, p.146)

(“Mă gândesc că ar fi trebuit să observ multe scene şi incidente care meritau

tinute minte.”)

“I sometimes hate my friend and adviser for being so frank with

me.”(A. Bantaş, op. cit., p.120)

(“Câteodată îl urăsc pe prietenul şi sfătuitorul meu pentru că este prea sincer

cu mine.” )

 Give me my dictionary and guide.

(“Dă-mi dicţionarul şi ghidul meu.”)

(4) Double objects are made up of two Direct Objects, of the person and of the

object, both governed by the same transitive verb, yet answering two different questions

(“whom ? “ and “what?”). This type of objects is used with verbs like: “to answer”, “to

take”, “to forgive”, “to hear”.

E.g. “It was Eliza’s turn to request me to stay another week.” (Ch. Brontë , Jane

Eyre, p.269)

36

(“Era rândul Elizei să mă roage să mai stau o săptămână.”)

“Ask him to come in at once.” (Oscar Wilde, The Picture of Dorian Gray,

p.102)

(“Roagă-l să intre odată.”)

“But if you want to shew him any attention, my dear ask him to come and

dine with us some day.” (Jane Austen, Emma, p.12)

(“Dar dacă vrei să-i acorzi atenţie, draga mea, roagă-l să vină să ia cina cu

noi într-o zi.”)

(5) Complex objects include two inseparable parts: a simple Direct Object linked

with another part which completes it and which is usually represented by a non-finite form

of the verb but also an adjective, noun or adverb.

E.g. “Repeat it, word for word, if you can, because I should wish him to know

what I said.” (Ch. Dickens, Hard Times, p.112)

(“Repeta cuvânt cu cuvânt dacă poţi, deoarece aş dori ca el să ştie ce am

spus.”)

The Structure of the Complex Objects

In all the different cases in which a complex object occurs it is almost impossible to

separate the simple direct object from its completion without altering the meaning of the

sentence.

For instance, in the sentence “You want me to go back on what I’ve sworn.” (“Vrei

ca eu să mă întorc la ce am jurat.”), if we placed a full stop or a comma after “me”, the

meaning of the sentence would change totally.

The first element of the complex object can be a reflexive pronoun as well having

the function of direct object with a transitive verb.

E.g. “He conceived himself to be calm-inexorably calm.” (Joseph Conrad,

Typhoon, p.120)

(“Se imagina a fi calm-extrem de calm.”)

There are cases when the direct object is represented by a whole subordinate clause

E.g. “And when he came out, the extremity of the ship made what went on

inside of her appear of little moment.” (J. Conrad, Typhoon, p.128)

37

According to the elements they are formed of, the complex objects can be classified

as follows:

(1) Complex object with a predicative completion expressed by o non-finite verb:

a) Accusative with an Infinitive (with or without “to”)

E.g. “Would you wish the gentleman to be shown in Ma’am?” (Ch. Dickens,

Hard Times, p.52)

(“Doriţi ca domnul să fie condus înăuntru, doamnă?”)

“His aunt detected the act and let it go.” (M. Twain, The Adventures of Tom

Sawyer, p.31)

(“Mătuşa lui a detectat actul şi i-a dat drumul.”)

b) Accusative with a Present Participle

E.g. “And they heard him walking to and for late in the night.” (Ch. Dickens,

Hard Times, p.22)

(“Şi l-am auzit plimbându-se încoace şi încolo până târziu.”)

“I can’t stand a door banging.” (J. Conrad, Typhoon, p.102)

(“Nu suport o uşă trântindu-se.”)

c) Genitive with a Gerund (present or perfect)

E.g. “The effect of that is to prevent our getting at them.” (Ch.Dickens, The

Pickwick Papers, p.150)

(“Efectul acestuia este să ne oprească pe noi să ajungem la ei.”)

d) Accusative with a Gerund (present or perfect)

E.g. “I hate him speaking to you like that.”

(“Urăsc când îţi vorbeşte aşa.”)

e) Accusative with a Past Participle

E.g. “I should but knock at the door to have it shut in my face.” (Ch. Brontë

Jane Eyre, p.43)

(“Am bătut la uşă şi drept pentru care mi-a fost trântită în nas.”)

(2) Complex object with a predicative expressed by:

a) a noun

E.g. “We appointed him secretary.”

38

(„L-am numit secretar.”)

I think it a great success.

(„Îl consider un mare succes.”)

b) an adjective

E.g. “ He painted the door green.”

(„A vopsit uşa verde.”)

“It makes me sick to remember it.”

(„Mi se face greaţă când îmi aduc aminte.”)

c) an adverb

E.g. “I desired him out of my eyes.”

(„Voiam să dispară din faţa mea.”)

“I like it here.”

(„Îmi place aici.”)

“I want him here.”

(„Îl vreau aici.”)

The Place of the Direct Object in the Sentence

As a rule it immediatelly follows the transitive verb it determines:

E.g. „Can I say anything for you?” (Ch. Dickens, The Pickwick Papers, p.184)

(„Pot să spun ceva pentru tine?”)

There are situations, however, when other parts of the sentence are present between

the predicative verb and its Direct Object such as:

1. An Indirect Object

E.g. “I am so damn absent-minded, I gave the driver my regular address just out

of habit and all.” (Jerome D. Salinger, The Catcher in the Rye, quoted from

Bantaş, Clonţea, Brânzeu, op. cit., p.168)

2. An Adverbial Modifier

E.g. “Thus saying, the merry old gentleman, in a good, round, sturdy voice,

commenced without more ado a Christmas carol.” (Ch. Dickens, The

Pickwick Papers, p.478)

39

(„Astfel spunând, bătrânul cel vesel cu o voce serioasă, a început fără prea

multă gălăgie un colind de Crăciun.”)

3. A Prepositional Object

E.g. „The following conversation may serve to explain to our readers this

apparently unaccountable alteration of deportment on the part of Mr. Tracy

Tupman.” (Ch.Dickens, op. cit., p.184)

(„Următoarea conversaţie ne poate servi pentru a le explica cititorilor noştri

această inexplicabilă schimbare de comportament din partea domnului Tracy

Tupman.”)

The Direct Object Clause

Definition

The Direct Object Clause is an extension of the group of words which can normally

express a direct object and discharges a role similar to that of the direct object in the simple

extended sentence or in any type of clause.

It can be introduced by conjunctions: ”that”, “whether”, “if”, “lest”, by relative

pronouns: “who”, “whom”, “what”, “which”, “whoever”, “whomever”, “whatever”, by

relative adjectives: “what”, “which”, “whose”, by adverbs: “when”, “where”, “how”,

“why”. In current speech the conjunction “that” can be omitted the subordination being

realised asyndetically.

The Direct Object Clause determines a transitive verb in a predicative mood or a

non-personal one. It is formed with the indicative or the subjunctive mood, the tense of the

predicate in it being logically conditioned by the tense of the predicate in the regent clause.

E.g. “I hear that the first performance has been postponed.” (L .Leviţchi, I.

Preda, op.cit,p.273)

“Mind you don’t fall!” (L.Leviţchi, I. Preda op.cit.. p.273)

“I don’t know where/when/why/how/he will go.” (A.Bantaş, op.cit.,p.277)

“I think you must know Hartfield enough to comprehend that.” (Jane Austen,

Emma, p.11)

40

One of the functions of the Direct Object Clause is that of forming the reflection in

indirect/ reported speech of questions proper:

E.g. He asked me: „do you agree?”

He asked me if I agreed.

He asked me: „Are you coming or not?”

He asked me whether I was coming or not.

After verbs like: “to have”, “to owe”, “to take”, “to think”, in certain constructions,

the Direct Object Clause is anticipated by the formal introductory direct object “it”:

E.g. “I owe it to him that I am a doctor.”

“I think it highly improbable that he should make another attempt to break

the world record.” (L. Leviţchi, I. Preda, op.cit.,p.274)

One issue regarding the Direct Object Clauses is that of the rules of the sequence of

tenses that are to be applied in the subordinate clause. The constraints of sequence of tenses

apply only in connection with the clauses subordinated to a “past” tense in the main clause

(that is the case of reported speech).

We have two main situations:

1. When in the regent clause we have one of the tenses belonging to the group of the

tenses belonging to “the group of the present” (present simple or continuous, present simple

or continuous, or future), there is perfect logical freedom in the subordinate direct object

clause:

E.g. “She says/ She has said/ She will say/ Tell her that you are ill/ that you have

been ill / that you were ill last week.”

Nevertheless, there are two limitations connected with moods rather than tenses:

a) after verbs of request, order and insistence the analytic subjunctive with “should”

is used in British English and the synthetic subjunctive in American English:

E.g. I request/ I demand/ I order that you should come here. (B, E.)

We demand that they come here at once. (A.E.)

b) the verb “to suggest” is followed normally by the indicative mood, though American

English would again resort to the synthetic subjunctive.

E.g. He suggests that they go right there. (B.E.)

41

He suggests that she go right there. (A.E.)

2. When in the regent clause we have one of the tenses or moods belonging to “the

group of the past” (past tense simple or continuous, past perfect, conditional mood) the

following three rules are to be applied:

a) simultaneity (concomitance, simultaneousness) of the direct object clause with the verb

in the main clause; thus, when the verb in the main clause is in the past, the direct object

clause has its verb in the past as well.

E.g. He said that it was 12 o’clock.

I am sure that he would say it was too late to do something.

b) anteriority (priority, previousness) to an action expressed by a past verb is indicated by

employing the past perfect in the subordinate clause.

E.g. He said he had taken some photos.

I knew he would answer he had not read the book yet.

c) posteriority (subsequence, ulteriority) against the action in the main clause is indicated

by the utilization of the future in the past (a fictitious tense with the aspect of a conditional

that does not indicate time precisely, it just marks the posteriority of the action in the direct

object clause whose timing is not definite)

E.g. I knew he would have come the next day.

OBSERVATION

In indirect speech, under the influence of a past tense in the main clause, the future perfect

in the subordinate clause becomes future perfect in the past.

E.g. Direct speech: “Come to me at 8 o’clock. I shall have arrived home by then.”

Indirect speech: He told me to come to him at 8 o’clock, as he would have arrived

home by that time.

Yet, there as some exceptions to the rules regarding the sequence of tenses implying

a direct object clause and these are when the verb in the subordinate clause describes a

general activity or a universal truth. However, there are two main types of truths:

1. General or universal truths which have to deal with some features in order to be

rightfully considered universal truths. Thus, they have to be:

a) Generally accepted

E.g. Our geography teacher explained to us that the planets move round the sun.

42

b) Scientifically proved

E.g. Water boils at 100 degrees.

c) Connected with the domain of some exact science

E.g. The First World War broke out in 1914.

d) Present in scientific, didactic texts or lectures

2. Assertions referring to prolonged, lasting or irreversible situations.

E.g. I knew that he is an orphan.

He told me that he will have to stay in bed for several months of a very bad

accident.

43

CHAPTER 3

The Indirect Object and the Indirect ObjectClause

Definition

The indirect object is a secondary part of the sentence and an objective determinant

of the predicate just like the direct object and indicates the person, thing or abstract notion

whom or which the action of the verb affects, influences, reaches indirectly. It shows the

person or thing indirectly receiving the action of the verb, benefiting by the respective

action or being destined to receive the object of the action.

It answers the questions “(to) whom?”, “(to) which?”, or less frequently, “(to)

what?”

It stands in the dative case and it is usually employed together with the direct object.

E.g. “Leave her to me.” (Th. Hardy, Tess of the D’Urbervilles, quoted from A.

Bantaş, op. cit, p.134).

(“Lasă-mi-o mie.”)

“ Pass me the butter, please ! “(L. Leviţchi, I. Preda, op.cit., p.239)

(“Dă-mi şi mie te rog untul!”)

But, there are cases when the indirect object is used without the direct one (as it is

generally implied) mostly after verbs which are normally transitive but, more or less

frequently also intransitive : “ to read “, “ to sing “, “to speak”, “to write”.

E.g. “Thou art a scholar; speak to it, Horatio. (Shakespeare, Hamlet, quoted from A.

Bantaş, op.cit, p.135)

(“Vorbeşte-le tu Horaţiu care eşti un învăţat în arte.”)

44

“ I understand you to have been in the habit of reading to your father?” (Ch.

Dickens, Hard Time, p.49)

(“Să înţeleg că erai obişnuit să-i citeşti tatălui tău?”)

Various intransitive verbs (or which are also used intransitivelly) can take or ask for

an indirect object:

a) With the preposition “to”: “to apologize”; “to belong”( a aparţine); “to dictate”

(a dicta); “to fall” (a reveni); “to happen” (a se întâmpla); “to remain” (a

rămâne); “to submit” (a se supune); “to speak” (a vorbi); “to talk” (a vorbi).

E.g. “It could happen to anyone.”

(“S-ar fi putut întâmpla oricui.”)

“I’ll talk to him about it.”

(“Am să vorbesc cu el despre asta.”)

b) Without the preposition “to”: “to last” (a dura); “to tell” (a spune); “to take (a

lua); “to write” (a scrie).

E.g. “This coat has lasted me ten years.”

(“Aceasta haină m-a ţinut zece ani.”)

“Tell me about your brother.”

(“Povesteşte-mi despre fratele tău.”)

Yet, there are more transitive verbs that can be followed or ask to be followed by an

indirect object. By the form and the position of the indirect objects these verbs may be

classified in three groups:

1. Verbs that can be followed only by a prepositional indirect object placed as

follows:

a) immediately after the verb, before the direct object. This positioning is the only

one possible after transitive verbs like: “to prove” (a dovedi); “to say” (a spune); “to

suggest” ( a sugera, a propune).

E.g. “He suggested to me that he might have another problem.”

(“Mi-a sugerat că ar avea o altă problemă.”)

“That said to him everything.”

(“Asta i-a spus totul.”).

45

b) after the direct object, an obligatory position when the latter is not too long.

Among the verbs that always ask for an indirect object with the preposition “to” there are

the following: “to ascribe” (a atribui); “to deliver” (a preda); “to commit” (a încredinţa);

“to dedicate” (a dedica); “to describe” (a descrie); “to explain” (a explica); “to introduce” (a

prezenta pe cineva); “to present” (a prezenta); “to refer” (a adresa)

E.g. “May I introduce my fiance to you?”

(“Dă-mi voie să ţi-l prezint pe logodnicul meu.”)

“He dedicated that song to his mother.”

(“I-a dedicat melodia mamei lui.”)

2. Verbs that can be followed only by an indirect object without a preposition. This

group includes verbs like: “to afford” (a oferi); “to allow” (a îngădui); “to deal” (a da o

lovitura); “to forgive” (a ierta); “to grudge” (a purta pică); “to refuse” (a refuza).

E.g. “I’ll drop him a line.”

(“Am să-i trimit două rânduri.”)

“Allow me to ask you something.”

(“Dă-mi voie să te întreb ceva.”)

3. Verbs that can be built with both forms of the indirect object. In this group we

have verbs like: “to do” (a face); “to give” (a da); “to leave” (a lăsa); “to lend” (a da cu

împrumut); “to owe” ( a datora); “to promise” (a promite); “to return” (a restitui); “to sell”

(a vinde); to show” (a arăta).

E.g. “I’ll give the copy to the pupils.”

(“Le voi da copia elevilor”) or

“I’ll give the pupils the copy.”

(“Le voi da elevilor copia.”)

In the same class of verbs are also included the following verbs : “to bring “ (a

aduce) ; “ to do “ (a face) ; “ to find “ (a găsi) ; “ to get “ (a obţine) after which the

prepositional form of the indirect object is built with “ for “.

E.g. “Buy me an icecream please.”

(“Cumpără-mi şi mie o îngheţată, te rog.”)

“ Buy one for me, too.”

46

(“Cumpără-mi şi mie una.”)

(“Cumpără şi pentru mine una.)

OBSERVATION

The direct object expressed by the pronoun “it “ is always placed before the indirect one

which, in this position, can be introduced without “to” when, in its turn, is expressed by a pronoun.

E.g. “I’ll show it you.”

(“Îţi arăt eu ţie.”)

In special questions, the interrogative pronoun, with the syntactical function of indirect

object, is preceded by the preposition “to “in literary language. In current speech, “to” is placed at

the end of the sentence, and the dative case can be replaced by the nominative case.

E.g. “To whom did you lend it?”

“Whom did you lend it to?”

“Who did you lent it to?”

(“Cui i-ai împrumutat-o?”)

The sentences in the active voice that contain both a direct object and an indirect

one allow (in certain cases) two passive transformations. Thus:

“The doctor did not allow the child any sugar.”

(“Doctorul i-a interzis copilului să mănânce zahăr.”)

“The child was not allowed any sugar.”

(“Copilului i s-a interzis să mănânce zahăr.”) or

“No sugar was allowed to the child.”

(“Nu i s-a permis copilului să mănânce zahăr.”)

“He told me to wait here.”

(“Mi-a spus să aştept aici.”),

becomes: “ I was told to wait here.”

(“Mi-a spus să aştept aici.”),

in which the subject is the indirect object of the active construction, the direct object being

retained (Retained Direct Object).

In more rare cases and only with certain verbs, the passive transformations occur as

follows:

“A sailor had told him the story.” (Active voice)

47

(“Un marinar îi spusese povestea.”)

“The story had been told him by a sailor.” (Passive voice)

(“Povestea îi fusese relatată de un marinar.”)

“They handed me the note the next day.” (Active voice)

(“Mi-au înmânat scrisoarea a doua zi.”)

“The note was handed to me the next day.” (Passive voice)

(“Scrisoarea mi-a fost înmânată a doua zi.”)

In the last example the subject is the direct object of the active construction with the

indirect object being retained (Retained Indirect Object).

The indirect object with “to” in passive constructions is more frequently used in

American English.

The Indirect Object with a Nominal Predicate

The indirect object with the preposition „to” can determine a nominal predicate as

well, whose predicative is expressed by nouns like: “benefit” (folos); “help” (ajutor);

“service” (ajutor); “use” (utilitate); “value” (valoare); or an adjective of the type:

“beneficial” (folositor), “helpful” (folositor); “invaluable” (de nepreţuit); “fatal” (fatal);

“harmful” (cunoscut), “hateful” (odios); “superior” (superior), “grateful” (recunoscător),

“indebted” (îndatorat).

E.g. “Can I be of any help to you?”

(“Pot să vă fiu de vreun ajutor?”)

“Excessive cold is hurtful to the health.”

(“Prea mult frig poate fi dăunător sănătăţii.”)

“I am much obliged to you for it.” (J. Austen, Emma, p.32)

(“Îţi sunt extrem de îndatorată pentru acest lucru.”)

“If that will be a consolation to you, yes.” (Ch. Dickens, A Tale of Two

Cities, p.155)

(“Dacă asta ţi-ar servi drept consolare, atunci da.”)

The indirect object is formed of a single word, especially when it is expressed by a

personal pronoun or a proper name (the preposition is thus omitted), or can be built with the

preposition “to”, characteristic of the dative case, or with the preposition “for”. Thus, in

48

contemporary English a construction like “I wrote him a letter yesterday” is preferred to the

construction “I wrote a letter to him yesterday.” This occurs on account of the fact that the

objects designating persons precede the objects that designate things or abstract notions and

that spoken English manifests a preference for shorter constructions.

E.g. “We owe you many apologies, Ma’am.” (Ch. Dickens, The Pickwick

Papers, p.74)

(“Vă datorăm mii de scuze, doamnă.”)

“Eustacia gave him her hand as before.” (Th. Hardy, The Return of the

Native, p.107)

(“Eustacia i-a oferit mâna ca şi înainte.”)

„I’ll just read you a few of the letters I wrote at that time.” (A.Bantaş, op.cit.,

p.136)

Ways of Expressing the Indirect Object

The indirect object is closely comected to the direct object and that is why it can be

expressed mostly by the same parts of speech as the former. It can be expressed:

1. By a common or proper noun with or without the preposition “to”

E.g. “I told George that I should come a little later.” (L. Leviţchi, Curs de

morfologia limbii engleze, p.69)

(“I-am spus lui George că o să vin puţin mai târziu.”)

“I do not show the soldiers that I recognize the tall man; he does not show

the soldiers that he recognizes me; we do it, and we know it, with our eyes.”

(Ch.Dickens, A Tale of Two Cities, p.170)

(“Eu nu le arăt soldaţilor ca îl recunosc pe bărbatul cel înalt; el nu le arată

soldaţilor că mă recunoaşte pe mine; pur şi simplu o facem, o ştim amândoi

din priviri.”)

“This picture belongs to her sister Jenny.”

(“Acest tablou este al surorii ei, Jenny.”)

2. By a personal pronoun

E.g. “Tell me, how does this relapse come about?” (Ch. Dickens, op.cit., p.184)

(“Spune-mi, cum a apărut această recidivă?”)

49

“I am glad you think I have been useful to her.” (J.Austen, Emma, p.33)

(“Mă bucur că tu crezi că i-am fost de folos.”)

3. By a reflexive pronoun

E.g. “I gave myself five minutes to get there.”

(“Mi-am spus că voi ajunge acolo în cinci minute.”)

“She gives herself airs of great lady.”

(“Îşi dă aere de mare doamnă.”)

4. By an interrogative pronoun (usually the preposition “to” is also employed)

E.g. “Whom did you tell the story to?”

(“Cui i-ai spus povestea?”)

“To whom did you lend it?”

(“Cui i-ai împrumutat-o?”)

5. By an indefinite pronoun

E.g. “And now for your excuse to the others, she said.” (Th. Hardy, The Return

of the Native, p.107)

(“Şi acum pentru a te scuza celorlalţi, a spus ea.”)

“Well, evil to some is always good to others.” (J.Austen, Emma, p.198)

(“Aşadar, răul unora este întotdeauna binele altora.”)

“I know you would say this to no one else.”

“To none. No, Miss Manette, to none.” (Ch. Dickens, A Tale of Two Cities,

p.154)

(“- Ştiu că nu ai spune asta nimănui.

- Nimănui. Nu, d-şoară Manette, nimănui.”)

6. By non-finite –ing clauses

E.g. “I’m giving reading magazines less importance lately.”

(“Am început să acord mai puţină importanţă cititului din reviste în ultimul

timp.”)

7. By a Prepositional Group

E.g. “Let’s give before lunch-time priority.”

(“Hai să dăm întâietate perioadei dinainte de prânz.”)

50

8. By an Indirect Object Clause

Eg: I’ll give the ball to whom wants to play with it.

(„O sa dau mingea cui vrea sa se joace cu ea.”)

She gave another interpretation to what I told her.

(„Ea a dat alta interpretare la ce i-am spus.”)

Formal Indicators of the Indirect Object

There are three main indicators that show the presence of an indirect object in a

sentence and for which cause are called formal:

1. The dative case, when the indirect object is expressed by a personal pronoun

(with the exception of “it”) or by the interrogative-relative pronoun “who”, preceded by the

prepositions “to” or “for”

E.g. “Please, send a postcard to me.”

(“Te rog trimite-mi o vedere.”)

“To whom did you lend the tape recorder?”

(“Cui i-ai împrumutat casetofonul?”)

2. The place of the indirect object in a sentence:

-after the direct object + the prepositions “to”or “for”

E.g. “ He sold his car to his neighbour.”

(“Şi-a vândut maşina vecinului său.”)

“She bought a new dress for her sister.”

(“A cumpărat o rochie nouă pentru sora ei.”)

-before the direct object, without a preposition

E.g. “Tom sold us his computer.”

(“Tom ne-a vândut nouă calculatorul lui.”)

“She bought her sister a new dress.”

(“Ea i-a cumpărat surorii ei o rochie nouă.”)

3. The transformation of the indirect object in the passive voice, when the personal

indirect object can:

- become the formal subject of the sentence.

E.g. “Mary promised the tickets to us.” (Active voice)

51

(“Maria ne-a promis nouă biletele.”)

“We were promised the tickets (by Mary).” (Passive voice)

(“Ni s-au promis biletele (de către Maria).”)

- be the retained indirect object:

E.g. “They showed the town to us.” (Active voice)

(“Ei ne-au arătat oraşul.”)

“The town was shown to us.” (Passive voice)

(“Oraşul ne-a fost arătat.”)

Syntactic and Semantic Features of the Indirect Object

1. Syntactic features

When the Predicator is followed by two objects, each of which can typically

become Subject in a passive clause, the first of these is considered the Indirect Object.

E.g. “The doctor gave the injured man treatment for shock.”

(“Doctorul i-a dat rănitului un tratament pentru şocul suferit.”)

“The injured man was given treatment for shock.”

(“Rănitului i-a fost dat un tratament pentru şocul suferit.”)

“Someone has sent the bank manager a letter-bomb.”

(“Cineva i-a trimis directorului de bancă o bombă într-o scrisoare.”)

“The bank manager has been sent a letter-bomb.”

(“Directorului de bancă i-a fost trimisă o bombă într-o scrisoare.”)

Another feature of the Indirect object is its ability to be replaced by a “to”- phrase

complement which follows the Direct Object:

E.g. “The doctor gave treatment for shock to the injured man.”

(“Doctorul i-a dat tratament pentru şocul suferit rănitului.”)

“ Someone has sent a letter-bomb to the bank manager.”

(“Cineva i-a trimis o bombă într-o scrisoare directorului de bancă.”)

“Sammy Karanja is teaching Swahili to the students.”

(“Sammy Karanja le predă Swahili studenţilor.”)

Unlike the Direct Object, the Indirect Object cannot be fronted in a passive WH-

interrogative or in a relative clause. The prepositional alternative is used:

52

E.g. “*Whom has the letter-bomb sent?”

“To whom has the letter-bomb sent?” or

“Who has the letter-bomb sent to?”

(“Cui i-a fost trimisă bomba din scrisoare?”)

“*The man whom the letter-bomb was sent is here.”

“The man to whom the letter-bomb was sent is here.” or

“The man who the letter-bomb was sent to is here.”

(“Bărbatul căruia i-a fost trimisă bomba din scrisoare este aici.”)

The Indirect Object can generally be left unexpounded (“neexprimat”) without

affecting the grammaticality of the clause:

E.g. “The doctor gave treatment for shock.”

(“Doctorul a oferit tratament pentru şoc.”)

“Someone has sent a letter-bomb.”

(“Cineva a trimis o bombă într-o scrisoare.”)

“Sammy Karanja is teaching Swahili.”

(“Sammy Karanja predă Swahili.”)

With some verbs (“to show”, “to tell”, “to teach”, etc.) the Direct Object may be

unexpounded. We still regard the single Object as Indirect Object, since a Direct Object

could easily be added:

E.g. “Who told you (the truth)?”

(“Cine ţi-a spus (adevărul)?”)

“Perhaps you could show me (how to do it).”

(“Poate poţi să-mi arăţi şi mie (cum se face).”)

“He’s teaching immigrant children (English).”

(“El le predă copiilor imigranţi (engleza).”)

2. Semantic features

The semantic roles associated with the Indirect Object are more restricted than with

the Subject and the Direct Object.

53

The Indirect Object is typically associated with the Recipient of the action. The

process expressed by the verb is extended from the Subject to the Indirect and Direct

Object. All the examples used so for have Recipient Indirect Objects.

Also associated with the Indirect Object is the Beneficiary or Intended Recipient as

in the following examples:

E.g. “I’ll get you some tea.”

(“Îţi aduc nişte ceai.”)

“We’ve bought the children balls.”

(“Le-am cumpărat copiilor mingii.”)

“Could you fetch me the scissors?”

(“Poţi să-mi aduci foarfecele?”)

“Bill has booked us seats in the front row.”

(“Bill ne-a rezervat locuri în primul rând.”)

The Beneficiary appears to be a less integrated participant in the situation than is the

Recipient and this fact is reflected in the syntax. Whereas Recipient Indirect Object have as

an alternative a “to”- phrase, with Beneficiary Indirect Objects the preposition is “for”:

E.g. “I’ll get some coffe for you.”

(“Aduc nişte cafea pentru tine.”)

“We’ve bought bicycles for the children.”

(“Am cumpărat biciclete pentru copii.”)

“Could you fetch the scissors for me?”

(“Poţi să aduci tu foarfecele în locul meu?”)

“Bill has saved a place for us in the front row.”

(“Bill a oprit câte un loc pentru noi în primul rând.”)

Moreover, most Beneficiary Objects do not easily become Subject in a passive

clause, although this restriction is not absolute:

E.g. “* You’ll be got some coffe.”

“The children have been bought bicycles.”

(“Copiilor le-au fost cumpărate biciclete.”)

“*Could I be fetched the scissors?”

54

“We have been saved a place in the front row.”

(“Ne-au fost rezervate locuri în primul rând.”)

Classification of the Indirect Object

As it can be easily deduced from the information about the Indirect Object offered

so far in this chapter, the Indirect Object is of two kinds:

1. Prepositional (long) indirect object.

2. Non-prepositional (short) indirect object

1. The prepositional indirect object is preceded by the prepositions “to” or “for”

(which is less frequently used).

E.g. “But, Mr. Darnay, oblivion is not so easy to me, as you represent it to be to

you.” (Ch. Dickens, A Tale of Two Cities, p.206)

(“Dar, domnule Darnay, a uita nu este atât de uşor pentru mine, cum pare a fi

pentru dumneavoastră.”)

“I’ve brought a message to you.”

“I’ve brought a present for you.”

OBSERVATION

In the last two examples the use of the prepositional indirect object, instead of the non-

prepositional one, changes in a way the meaning of the sentence as it implies emphasis. For

instance, in the former example the implication is that “it is confidential”, while in the latter is that

“it is only for you and not for somebody else.”

Moreover when a prepositional indirect object is stressed, in one way or another (a

situation that is rather wrong) it leads to a construction that may have undesirable and even

impolite effects:

E.g. “I’ve brought a present for her (possible implication: “you shouldn’t touch

it”)

The utilization of the indirect object in its prepositional form is required by

contemporary English grammar mainly in a few situations:

1. When the speaker wants to emphasize the indirect object or to place it in contrast

with another indirect object

E.g. “I shall show the letter to you. (but not to her)”

55

(“O să-ţi arăt scrisoarea (doar) ţie.”) (A.Bantaş, op.cit., p.137)

“I declare to you on the faith of a gentleman, that I have long dismissed it

from my mind.” (Ch. Dickens, A Tale of the Two Cities, p.206)

(“Îţi mărturisesc ţie, pe cuvânt de gentelman, că mi-am scos demult acest

lucru din minte.”)

“I will do nothing for you. (but for others will)” (Ch. Dickens, op.cit., p251)

(“N-o să fac nimic pentru tine.”)

OBSERVATION

As in most cases the indirect object includes the feature (+human), usually it is contrast of

person that is achieved.

2. When the direct object is expressed by a pronoun, while the indirect one is

expressed by a noun:

E.g. “He gave them to his mother.”

(“I le-a dat mamei lui.”)

“Then, if you please, you shall send it all to Mrs.Goddard - I do not know -.”

(J. Austen, Emma, p.178)

(“Atunci, dacă doreşti, poţi să trimiţi totul doamnei Goddard - nu ştiu-.”)

“That you do not give another half-second to the subject. To Hartfield, if you

please, Mrs. Ford.” (J.Austen, op.cit., p. 178)

(“Să nu mai acordaţi nici o secundă acestui subiect. La Hartfield dacă doriţi,

doamnă Ford.”)

3. When both objects are expressed by personal pronouns

E.g. “Send her to them.”

“Show them to me.”

4. When the indirect object is placed at the head of the sentence (in the interrogative

form).

E.g. “To whom did you lend the book?”

“To which of the boys did you give the sweets?”

Emphatic declarative sentences may also have the indirect object at their head, thus

expressing contrast of person).

E.g. “To him I gave the order, not to you.”

56

5. When the indirect object heads a relative attributive clause

E.g. “The boy to whom I gave the letter has lost it.”

6. After the verbs: “to announce” (a anunţa), “to ascribe” (a atribui), “to attribute”,

“to communicate” (a comunica), “to contribute” (a contribui), “to declare” (a declara), “to

dedicate” (a dedica), “to deliver” (a oferi), “to describe” (a descrie), “to devote” (a se

devota), “to disclose” (a dezvălui), “to explain” (a explica), “to hint” (a sugera), “to

indicate” (a indica), “to interpret” (a interpreta), “to introduce” (a prezenta), “to open” (a

deschide), “to owe” (a datora), “to point out” (a scoate în evidenţă), “to present” (a

prezenta), “to propose” (a propune), “to relate” (a relata), “to repeat” (a repeta), “to report”

(a raporta), “to return” (a înapoia), “to say” (a spune), “to speak” (a vorbi), “to submit” (a

propune), “to suggest” (a sugera), “to talk” (a vorbi), “to translate” (a traduce).

E.g. “He ascribed the mistake to her.”

(“I-a atribuit ei greşeala.”)

“I cannot describe to you the agony that these reflections inflicted upon me.”

(Mary Shelley, Frankenstein, p.116)

(“Nu pot să-ţi descriu agonia pe care aceste reflectări mi-au adus-o.”)

“He explained to the students the theory.”

OBSERVATION

The verb “to explain” requires special attention as it is an ample source of mistakes for

Romanians because its usage differs in Romanian and English. (The correct versions: “He explained

something to me”, “He explained the lesson to us.”)

2. The non-prepositional form of the indirect object is not accompanied by a

preposition and is extensively used in conversation.

E.g. “Why did you rob me of my last consolation?” (Mary Shelley, op.cit.,

p.120)

(“De ce mi-ai luat şi ultima consolare?”)

“It will give you everything that you want.” (J. Austen, op.cit., p.58)

(“Îţi va da tot ceea ce îţi doreşti.”)

“Well, if you give me such kind encouragement, Mr. Elton, I believe I shall

try what I can do.” (J.Austen, op.cit.., p.34)

57

(“Păi, dacă îmi daţi o aşa încurajare, domnule Elton, cred că voi încerca să

văd ce pot face.”)

The Position of the Indirect Object

In theory, the direct object should precede the indirect one according to the former’s

direct link to the transitive verb or phrase. But, in Standard English this happens only in

those cases when the indirect object is accompanied by attributes, thus becoming longer

than the direct object.

Therefore, the non-prepositional indirect object takes the third place in the sentence,

preceding the direct one which takes the fourth place.

This can be explained as it follows:

1. In English, the shorter element precedes the longer one, in order to ensure perfect

fluency of delivery, and a more logical stressing of the focus of the utterance in terms of

intonation, of its components and of logical motivation.

2 If the indirect object takes position IV in the sentence (after the direct object), this

gives the indirect object some degree of emphasis or contrast not always required or

wished.

3. Nomina denoting persons take precedence of those lacking the (+human) feature.

An exception is the placing of the indirect object without a preposition after the

direct object, if the later is expressed by the pronoun “it”

E.g. “Give it me.”

However, even in that case, there are examples when the preposition is preserved

with the indirect object.

E.g. „Give it to him.” (Maltz, Peace on Earth, quoted from A.Bantaş,

op.cit., p.140)

Moreover the preposition “for” is very seldom dropped.

E.g. “I bring fresh showers for the thirsting flowers.” (P.B.Shelley, The Could

quoted from A. Bantaş, op. cit., p.140)

(“Eu aduc duşuri reci pentru însetatele flori.”)

58

In point of syntactical analysis, the presence of the prepositions “to” or “for” in

front of an object may give rise to difficulties in discriminating between indirect objects

and prepositional objects.

Firstly, the essence of the indirect object is that of “receiving end” or “target” of a

verb of conveyance or transmission, normally transitive.

Next, as a formal criterion, the indirect object is the only one that permits the

possibility to transform the prepositional construction into a non-prepositional construction.

In the sentences:

“I’m appealing to you to help us.” or

“I want you to know what this chance means to me.”

The underlined words are prepositional objects because the verbs in the sentence

(“to appeal”, “to mean”) do not convey or transmit anything to them, because the respective

persons do not benefit or sufler by the action, and because on the other hand, from the

formal point of view, they cannot be transformed into (non-prepositional) dative

constructions, as it can be done in changing “tell the truth to me” into “tell me the truth” or

“I offered a chair to him” into ” I offered him a chair.”

In such cases, the preposition is required by another type of relation than the dative

one (the prepositional object of relation), or it is inherent in the verb itself (verbs with

obligatory preposition.)

An example hard to interpret would be:

“She won’t say no to going.” (Th. Hardy, Tess of the D’Urbevilles, quoted

from A.Bantaş, op.cit., p.142)

Here, “going” is not the indirect object of the verb “to say”, because it is not a part

of the idiom “to say no to something” (“a refuza ceva”), and moreover it does not represent

a person benefiting by the effects of an action or suffering from them.

Another source of difficulties is provided by the class of verbs followed by “to” as

an obligatory preposition.

E.g. “Britain gears her trade more and more to the dollar market.” (A. Bantaş, op.

cit., p.142)

59

(“Marea Britanie îşi direcţionează tot mai mult economia în funcţie de piaţa

dolarului.”)

The verb “to gear” has the meaning of “to direct” and is necessarily employed with

the preposition “to” and cannot be conceived without it, although there is no dative relation

to be thought of.

Another much discussed point is raised by the constructions in which the indirect

object appears in the form of a refexive pronoun.

E.g. “I told myself that I was right.”

(“Mi-am spus că trebuie să am dreptate.”)

The confusion with a possible refexive verb “to tell oneself” should be avoided by

comparing “I told myself” with “He told me”, thus the presence if the non-prepositional

indirect object appearing quite clear.

The Indirect Object Clause

1. The indirect object clause is the extension on the plane of the complex sentence

of an indirect object in a simple extended sentence.

The frequency of such clauses is very small, adding to this that in English grammar

an indirect object primarily refers to a person (expressed by a noun, a proper name or a

personal pronoun) and to a much smaller extent to an object or abstract notion.

E.g. “Give the book to whoever needs it.”

“He gave the wrong interpretation to whatever I had said.”

“She leads another colouring to what I say.”

The indirect object clause can determine an intransitive or transitive verb or a

nominal predicate. It can be introduced by a relative pronoun precede by the preposition

„to”: “whoever”, “whomever”, “whichever”, “whatever”, “who”, “whom”.

E.g. “He told the story to whoever would listen.”

(“Povestea întâmplarea oricui voia să-l asculte.”)

“Give the ticket to whomever you like.”

(“Dă biletul oricui vrei.”)

In what the sequence of tenses is concerned the indirect object clause does not fall

under any restriction.

60

E.g. “He gave no thought to what we are supposed to do / to what will happen

tomorrow / to what had been going on here.”

CHAPTER 4

The English Direct and Indirect Objects (Clauses) vs.

the Romanian Direct and Indirect Objects (Clauses)

It is well known that two persons are different in many ways. One cannot find two

persons to be identical, to think in the same way, to act in the same way or to speak in the

same way.

The same thing happens with different languages. They may have similarities in

their vocabulary and grammar, but more probably they have many differences.

This chapter deals especially with these differences and similarities impossed by the

direct and indirect objects (clauses) in two distinct languages, the author’s native language,

that is Romanian, and the language used in this paper and embraced by the author after

years of study, that is English.

The two languages we are talking about are as different as the countries they belong

to are. First of all it is the difference between Latin countries and Germanic countries. In

the first class we can include peoples like France, Spain, Portugal, Italy, and Romania and

in the second one we have Germany, The Netherlands and Great Britain. Secondly, we can

say that the languages from the former class have their basic vocabulary and part of their

grammar greatly influenced by Latin, while those in the latter class are influenced by the

Germanic dialects.

But we can say that English was also influenced by Latin which came through the

relations that England had, throughout the years, with the French people unlike Romanian

which did not receive too many Germanic terms into its vocabulary. Only nowadays, the

latter started to enrich its vocabulary with terms coming from German or English but in

what the grammar is concerned this will never change.

61

The influence that English has on Romanian comes from the fact that the former is a

language used and spoken all over the world and which is taught in schools as a second

language.

But, returning to our theme we will discuss the Romanian direct and indirect objects

and clauses.

We shall start with the direct object and see how it is perceived in the Romanian

grammar.

As a definition the “Grammar of the Romanian Academy" states that the direct

object functions in the verbal group and, sometimes, in the interjectional one, as a

subordinate term discharging a dependence relation with the centre of the group and it is

realised by a nominal group in the accusative case.

E.g. “Elevul mănâncă un măr.”

(“The student eats an apple.”)

“Mă felicită.”

(“He congratulates me.”)

The regent of this syntactical position can be, both in Romanian and English, a

transitive verb which in its turn can be bivalent or trivalent. Thus, a bivalent transitive verb

is the one that has two different performers of the action: a subject and a direct object.

E.g. “Copilul citeşte o carte.”

S C.d.

(“The child reads a book.”)

The trivalent verbs permit the combination with a subject, a direct object and an

indirect object.

E.g. “Prietena mea îmi trimite o scrisoare.”

S C.i. C.d.

(“My girlfriend sends me a letter.”)

One distinct feature that the Romanian direct object has and the English one does

not is that the former can sometimes determine a verb without a subject.

E.g. “Mă ninge.”

“Mă plouă”.

62

(“*It snows me.”)

(“*It rains me.”)

The grammatical characteristics of the Romanian direct object that differentiate it

from other parts of the sentence are the following:

1. The possibility of being expressed by an unstressed form of the personal pronoun

in the accusative case (“forma neaccentuata”)

E.g. “Mănânc fructe – Le mănânc.”

(“I eat fruit –I eat them.”)

“Întreb pe elev –Îl intreb.”

(“I ask the pupil – I ask him. “)

2. The double expression of the same direct object. Thus, it can be expressed by an

unstressed form of the personal pronoun and the stressed form of the personal pronoun

accompanied by the preposition “pe” or the noun form preceded by the preposition “pe”.

E.g. “Te văd pe tine.”

(“I see you.“)

“O văd pe Maria.”

(“I can see Mary.”)

3. The occurance in passive constructions with the possibility of changing from

direct object into subject.

E.g. “Profesorul a scris o carte – Cartea a fost scrisă de profesor.”

(“The teacher wrote a book – The book was written by the teacher.”)

One can easily see that out of these three characteristics only one can be attributed

to the English direct object as well, namely the last one with the possibility that the direct

object has to become the subject of a passive sentence.

The first characteristic cannot occur in English on account of the fact that the

English personal pronoun has no unstressed form; while the second characteristic cannot

occur because of the fact mentioned above and that there is no need for the direct object to

be doubled.

63

It is true that there is a double direct object in English, but it is different from the

Romanian one because it designates two different objects connected with the same

transitive verb. In Romanian the two direct objects refer to the same person or thing.

E.g. “Ask me no questions.” (Double object in English)

“Pe aceea o văd.” (Double object in Romanian)

(“That I see.”)

Although in point of the regent of the direct object both languages agree upon the

transitive verb, there is a difference in the fact that not all verbs that are transitive in

Romanian are also transitive in English. For instance, the sentence “L-am visat azi-noapte”

is rendered in English by “I dreamed of him last night” (which no longer contains a direct

object).

Moreover, in Romanian the direct object can have as a regent transitive verbal

phrase and a predicative interjection.

E.g. “Ţine minte asta!”

(“Remember this!”)

“Îţi aduc aminte ceva “

(“I will remind you something. “)

“Pleosc o palmă!”

(“Splash, a slap in the face.”)

In English, the Romanian verbal phrases are rendered by verbs while the direct

object which can have as regent a predicative interjection does not make sense.

OBSERVATION

While in English the direct object can round off the meaning of an adjective, in Romanian

is only one such case and that is the case of the adjective “dator” which in English will be translated

by a verb.

E.g. “Îmi e dator bani.”

(“He owes me money.”)

In that the transitive verbs are concerned, in Romanian, they can be followed by an

obligatory direct object or direct object clause (that is they do not have meaning without the

direct object completing it) or can be followed by an optional direct object or direct object

clause. For the first class we have verbs like: “to add” (a adăuga), “to do” (a face), “to

64

meet” (a întâlni), “to caress” (a mângâia), “to put” (a pune), “to represent” (a reprezenta),

“to send” (a trimite), etc.

E.g. “Ea mângâie pisica.”

(“She caresses her cat. “)

“El adoră copiii.”

(“He adores children.”)

In the class of the optional direct objects we have verbs like “to plough” (a ara), “to

drink” (a bea), “to eat” (a mânca), “to repeat” (a repeta), “to study” (a studia),”to translate”

(a traduce), etc.

E.g. “El ară (pământul).”

(“He ploughs (the earth). “

“Bea/ Mănâncă (ce vrea).”

(“He drinks/ eats (what he wants).”)

One aspect in which the two languages are similar is that of the verbs that can be

either transitive when they are followed by a direct object and intansitive when they can

form a predicate by themselves. But, in Romanian there is a difference because the verb

changes its meaning. For instance, in English the verbs “to write’ is transitive in “He is

writing a letter” and intransitive in “He writes” (with the meaning of “He is a writer.”).

Although the meaning of the two sentences is slightly different, the meaning of the verb “to

write” does not change, it still implies the action of writing. In Romanian, the things are a

bit different as the meaning of the verb is different.

E.g. “El aduce (transportă) apă.” (transitive verb)

(“He brings water.”)

“El aduce (seamănă) cu mama lui.” (intransitive verb)

(“He resembles his mother.”)

When speaking about the ways of expressing a direct object, in Romanian we have

several ways that are not found in English. For example, it can be expressed:

-by a pronominal phrase which in English is translated by other parts of speech:

E.g. “Nu spune cine ştie ce.” (nimic, mare lucru)

(“He doesn’t say much.”)

65

“Mănâncă te miri ce.” (mai nimic)

(“She eats very little.”)

-by an adjective, adverb or intejection that become nouns by adding the definite or

indefinite article or the preposition “pe”.

E.g. “Oricine apreciază frumosul.”

(“Anybody appreciates the beautiful.”)

“Părinţii îi vor binele.”

(“His parents want the best for him.”)

“Am auzit un of .”

(“I’ve heard an oh .”)

“Pe prost îl remarcă oricine.”

(“Anyone can distinguish the stupid.”)

“Scoate pe ah din propoziţie.”

(“Delete the ah from the sentence.”)

-by a pronoun denoting politeness, which in English is rendered by the personal

pronoun

E.g. “Vă strigă pe dumneavoastră.”

(“He is calling you. “)

The syntactical position of a direct object expressed by a noun and which

determines a verb can be fulfilled, in Romanian, in two ways:

1. by the non-prepositional accusative

2. by the prepositional accusative, in which case the noun or its substitute is

preceded by the preposition “pe”.

Needless to say would be the fact that the preposition “pe” is a grammatical

indicator of the direct object specific to Romanian. In this situation “pe” is no longer a

centre of the prepositional group, the thematic role being attributed exclusively by the

verbal centre and, that is why, the direct object remains unchanged both in the presence and

in the absence of the preposition: “Am ajutat pe elev/ elevul/ un elev.” (“I helped the pupil/

a pupil.”)

OBSERVATION

66

The use of the prepositional or the non-prepositional direct object is conditioned by the

ways of expressing the direct object. Thus, the non-prepositional direct object appears with the

inanimate nouns

E.g. “Maria închide uşa.”

(“Maria shuts the door.”)

“Adora puterea.”

(“He loved power.”)

The prepositional direct object is rather met with nouns denoting persons or personalized

animate:

E.g. “Îl chem pe Lăbuş.”

(“I will call Lăbuş. “)

“O văd pe mama.”

(“I can see my mom.”)

The Romanian Direct Object Clause

In Romanian, the direct object clause is of two types according to its connector:

1. relative

2. conjunctional

1. The relative direct object clause is usually introduced by a relative pronoun and it

can be direct object clause proper or interrogative

E.g. ‘Nu înţeleg ce a spus.”

(“I don’t understand what he has said.”)

“Opreşte pe oricine îi iese în cale.”

(“He stops whoever gets in his way.”)

“Maria întreabă cine a venit.”

(“Maria asks who has come.”)

2. The conjunctional direct object clause is usually introduced by conjunctions (in

Romanian “că”, “să”, “dacă”, “de”, “ca…..să”)

E.g. “El crede că Maria a plecat.”

(“He thinks that Maria has left.”)

The direct object clause is also doubled and this seems to appear also in English

E.g. “Pe care i-am intalnit i-am trimis acasă.”

67

(“Who I met I sent them home.”)

“Daca te-am iertat am făcut-o pentru că aşa am crezut că e bine.”

(“If I forgave you, I did it because I thought it was the right thing to do.”)

The place of the direct object in a sentence seems to be the same in both languages,

after the transitive verb or when it is met with an indirect object, after the indirect object.

One feature that English has and Romanian does not is the sequence of tenses which

the Romanian direct object clause does not obey.

The indirect object appears in Romanian grammar as a component of the verbal

group representing the receiver or the beneficiary of the process encoded by the verb. On

the level of the simple sentence it is expressed by a noun or pronoun (stressed or

unstressed) in the dative case while on the level of the complex sentence it is expressed by

an indirect clause introduced relatively.

OBSERVATION

The indirect object is actualized in a verbal group, interjectional group, adjectival group or

adverbial group, as a subordinate term in a dependency relation established within the group.

In most situations, the indirect object is an obligatory constituent of the above

mentioned groups.

E.g. “Ţi-e foame.”

(“You are hungry.”)

“Potrivit legii acest lucru este ilegal.”

(“According to the law this thing is illegal.”)

OBSERVATION

In the examples above the indirect object has this function only in Romanian. In “You are

hungry”, we do not have any indirect object, the Romanian indirect object becoming subject in

English. In the second example one might say that in English it is a prepositional object which in

fact is not true because the preposition “according to” is a preposition belonging to the dative case

and is used with an indirect object.

Yet, with some verbs the indirect object can be optional.

E.g. “Ion mi-a deschis uşa.”

(“John opened the door for me.”)

“Bravo lui!”

68

(“Good for him!”)

“Ea îţi zâmbeşte.”

(“She smiles to you.”)

In all these examples the verbs can easily have meaning without placing the indirect

object next to them. We can say: “John opened the door”, “Good!”, “She smiles”.

OBSERVATION

With the verb “to be” the indirect object can be either obligatory or optional. It is obligatory

if the subject of the sentence denotes a physical state, in which case the indirect object is no longer

present when translating the sentence into English:

E.g. “Îmi e sete.”

(“I am thirsty.”)

“Îmi e ruşine.”

(“I am ashamed.”)

“El mi-e prieten.”

(“He is friend to me.”)

It is optional when the subject denotes weather conditions:

E.g. “Mi-e frig.”

(“I am cold.”)

“El (mi)-e credincios.”

(“He is faithful (to me).”)

One aspect that worths mentioning is that of the case of the indirect object.

While in English the indirect object is restricted to the dative case although he is

used with prepositions, in Romanian the indirect object can be also found in the accusative

case accompanied by prepositions like: “de”, “ca”, “către”, “la”. But we must state that in

English this is rendered by a prepositional object.

In Romanian, we have two other types of dative case that cannot be found in

English, that is the so-called “possesive-dative” (dativul posesiv) and “locative-dative”

(dativul locativ)

E.g. “El îmi ştie limitele.”

(“He knows my limits. “)

“Ion se aşterne drumului.”

(“John lies along the road.”)

69

Like the direct object, the indirect object can also have as a regent an interjection

and an adjective, but it also has an adverb.

E.g. “Na-ţi o carte” (interjection)

(“Here it is a book for you.”)

“Bravo mie.” (interjection)

(“Good for me. “

“Vai mie.” (interjection)

(“Poor me.”)

“Este un concurs de poezie deschis elevilor din toată ţara.” (adjective)

(“It is a poetry contest open to all the pupils in the country. “

“Ea îţi este inferioară ţie.” (adjective)

(“She is inferior to you.”)

“S-a comportat adecvat situaţiei.” (adverb)

(“He behaved adequate to the situation.”)

“Aidoma bărbaţilor, Maria umbla cu cuţit la brâu.” (adverb)

(“Exactly like men, Maria carried a knife at her waist. “)

In point of expression the indirect object is mostly expressed by the same parts of

speech in both languages. One aspect should be mentioned though. In Romanian, it can be

expressed by numerals which in English are not so frequently met.

E.g. “Are două feţe, dar numai primei i-a dat bani.”

(“He has two daughters but only to the first he gave money.”)

“Le-a spus la doi dintre candidaţi să revină.” 

(“He told to two of the candidates to come back.”)

OBSERVATION

The first example can be a source of mistakes in English, as an English speaking person

may interprete it differently and translate it like: “He has two daughters but only to the older one he

gave money. “ One may understand that the first daughter is also the oldest and use instead of a

numeral, an adjective without changing the meaning. Thus, it depends on the way a person might

interprete the message.

In Romanian the types of indirect objects are: simple, multiple, and double. In

English, they are classified according to their usage with a preposition or without one. This

70

does not happen in Romanian as the indirect object in the dative case is not used

prepositionally. Moreover, the double indirect object does not exist in English

E.g. “Cartea aceasta îi va fi necesară Mariei.”

(“This book will be necessary to/for Maria.”)

There are also some expressions in Romanian that contain an indirect object, but

which cannot occur with an indirect object in English

E.g. “Îmi tuna şi-mi fulgera.”

(“It thunders and it lightens to me. “)

“Îmi zice Popescu.”

(“They say Popescu to me.”)

The indirect object can appear in elliptical constructions of the type “Odă

bucuriei(=Odă închinată bucuriei)” or “Salutări colegilor! (=Transmite salutări colegilor!)”

that can be rendered in English as well : “Ode to joy “, “Greetings to the colleagues!”

In point of topics, we have in Romanian the case of the indirect object expressed by

an unstrerssed form of the personal pronoun that can precede the verb.

E.g. “Îi dau Mariei tot ce vrea.”

(“I give Maria all that she wants. “)

“Îi spun să vină?”

(“Shall I tell him to come? “)

The Romanian Indirect Object Clause

The indirect object can be realised on the level of the complex sentence by

subordinate clause which bears the same name.

In literary language the indirect object clause is introduced by a connector (relative

or indefinite pronoun, or, rarely a relative or indefinite adjective) in the dative case. Let’s

consider the following sentences:

a) “Cui nu-i place cartea, nu i se vor dărui cărţi.”

(Who doesn’t like studying, won’t be given books. )

b) “Îi dau sfaturi oricui mă ascultă.”

(“I give advice to whoever listens to me.”)

c) rarely “Devine ostil oricărei persoane îl contrazice.”

71

(“He becomes hostile to whoever person contradicts him.”)

The relative or indefinite connector in the indirect object clause always stays in the

dative case, this being required by the verb or the adjective in the regent clause. Sometimes,

like in (a), its dative form is that proper to the syntactic position that it occupies in the

subordinate (=indirect object). In other cases, like in (b) tha dative form does not

correspond th the syntactic function the connector has in the subordinate (=subject which is

usually in the nominative case); in these situations appears the syntactic phenomenon called

“blending of the regent clause with the subordinate”, the subject being in some other case

than the typical one. The same happens when the indirect object clause is introduced by an

indefinite or relative adjective in the dative case like in (c); the noun in the dative case,

whose attribute is the connector and it has the syntactic function of subject is an exception

to the rule that binds the subject to the nominative case.

OBSERVATION

The relative pronoun in the dative case can have the syntactic function of indirect object

when it introduces other types of subordinates.

E.g. “Se ştie cui i-a revenit averea.” (Subject clause)

(“It is known to whom they gave the fortune.”)

“Ştiu cui i-a revenit averea.” (Direct object clause)

(“I know to whom they gave the fortune.”)

In the familiar or even dialectal speech, the indirect object clause can be expressed

by a prepositional group having at its top the preposition “la” or less frequent, “către”,

followed by a relative or indefinite connector in the accusative case. This situation is not

present in English.

E.g. “Mă adresez la cine mă poate ajuta.”

(“I address myself to whoever can help me.”)

“(Îi) refuz ajutorul meu la oricine nu îl merită.”

(“I refuse to give my help to whoever does not deserve it.”)

“A zis către care era acolo.”

(“He spoke to who was there.”)

With the exception of the sentences where the subordinate includes a verb with the

obligatory preposition “la”, of the type “Mă adresez la cine te-ai referit tu mai devreme.”

72

(“I will address myself to whom you referred earlier.”), in which the syntactic function of

the conector “la cine” is that of prepositional object; or the popular sentences in which

“cui” is replaced by the “la” connector in the accustaive (with the syntactic function of

indirect object) of the type “Mă adresez la cine te-ai adresat şi tu.” (“I will address to whom

you addressed yourself.”), in the examples above also appears the blending phenomenon, as

in the indirect object clauses under discussion the relative or indefinite pronoun has the

syntactic function of subject, a position that is not compatible with the accusative case

asked by the preposition.

The indirect object clauses introduced by both connectors in the dative case and in

the accusative case, can be doubled in the regent clause by unstressed pronominal forms in

the dative case. In the sentences in which the connector in the subordinate clause is an

indirect object, the doubling appears twice: in the subordinate for the relative connector,

and in the main clause for the indirect object clause.

The indirect object clauses that have as a regent an adjective can be doubled only if

the adjective fulfils the syntactic function of a predicative

E.g. “Instrumentul îi este util cui se pricepe la mecanică. “

(“The instrument can be useful to whom knows mechanics.”)

If the adjective has the syntactic function of attribute, the indirect object clause

cannot be doubled.

E.g. “A nimerit într-un mediu propice cui ştie să linguşească.”

(“He got into a world favourable to those who know how to flatter people.”)

The indirect object clauses introduced by the preposition “către”+ connector, or

those whose regent is an adverb or interjection, cannot be doubled in the main clause.

73

CONCLUSIONS

There are several problems and controversies within the course under discussion.

Regarding the presentation of the objects in English I should say that the only

grammarian that takes into consideration all tha three objects is A. Bantaş, while the others

discuss them separately. He succeeds in presenting them together and only afterwards he

builts a full debate about each of them.

I could also notice that the definitions given by various grammarians are different in

some way. For instance, Leon Leviţchi and Ioan Preda, on the one hand, and Mark

LeTourneau, on the other hand, view and discuss the direct object in its relation with the

transitive verb while others merely mention this in their definition.

In what the indirect object is concerned, what I found most interesting was Mark

LeTourneau’s definition which states that the indirect object is an optional NP complement

of a transitive verb. He also makes the first distinction between the direct and the indirect

objects: the indirect object is the first postverbal nominal phrase and it usually denotes

persons or rarely higher animals.

Another interesting fact would be Inna Marinescu and Janina Radu’s term of

transmission verbs, that the verbs that are followed by indirect objects (e.g. to give) as we

can identify both the speaker and the receiver and the transmitted object.

In conclusion, the definitions offered by different grammarians view tha two objects

in various ways depending either on their syntactic properties or the semantic ones. Yet,

after synthetizing these various definitions, I can conclude that the two objects are

interrelated and they cannot be analysed separately, speaking about one without mentioning

the other.

74

One of the more important issues regarding the direct object would be that of its

relation with the verb. I had to distinguish between transitive and intransitive verbs as when

comparing two languages one may notice that a transitive verb in Romanian, for example,

is not necessarily transitive in English as well.

The semantic features of the direct object are usually neglected although they are

very important. Thus, a direct object can be affected, effected, instrument, phenomenon,

and range. The last of these features is employed in the classification of the direct object

under the name of cognate direct object.

In its ways of expressing I found most interesting the prepositional group which

although presents a clear meaning in English, a translation of it into Romanian is very

difficult to establish.

When talking about its classification, I could mention one type of object which is

more difficult for one to settle. This the complex object which is formed of a simple direct

object linked with another part represented by a non-finite form of a verb (or an adjective,

noun or adverb).

The problem imposed by the direct object clause is that of the sequence of tenses

which, for example, in Romanian does not exist. Yet, these rules of the sequence of tenses

function only when the clause is subordinate to a “past” tense in the main clause and that is

the case of the reported speech. Here we have three rules: of simultaneity, of anteriority and

of posteriority.

When compared to Romanian the direct object cannot have an unstressed form in

English on account of the fact that the English personal pronoun has no unstressed form

and it cannot be doubled because of the fact mentioned above and that there is no need for

the direct object to be doubled. Another characteristic that yhe Romanian object has and the

English one does not is that of the preposition “pe” that is a grammatical indicator of the

direct object specific to Romanian.

Although the indirect object may be considered by some an easy part of the

sentence that can be immediately detected in a sentence, there are also some problems

posed by it. These problems appear very clear especially when two languages are

compared. From the very beginning the case of the indirect object is a controversy as in

75

English it stays in the dative case only while in Romanian it can stay in the accusative case

as well.

Another characteristic of the indirect object that differentiate it a lot from the direct

one is that it can be used after intransitive verbs with or without the preposition “to” and

after nominal predicates whose predicative is of certain type.

In what the semantic features of the indirect object are concerned, it is associated

either with the Recipient of the action or with the Beneficiary (or Intended Recipient), the

latter having as alternative a “for”-phrase and having fewer possibilities of becoming the

subject of a passive sentence.

In its ways of expressing, it can be expressed by a reflexive pronoun, by “ing”-

clauses and by prepositional groups, a fact that is hardly met with Romanian.

In Romanian, with the verb “to be” the indirect object can be either obligatory or

optional. It is obligatory if the subject of the sentence denotes a physical state, in which

case the indirect object is no longer present when translating the sentence into English:

The indirect object clause, unlike the direct one seems not to pose any problems as

it does not fall under the rules of the sequence of tenses and its frequency is very small on

account of the fact that an indirect object refers primarily to a person (expressed by a noun,

a proper name, or a personal pronoun) who cannot be extended into a clause very often.

When compared with Romanian I could find that in the familiar or even dialectal

speech, the indirect object clause can be expressed by a prepositional group having at its

top the preposition “la” or less frequent, “către”, followed by a relative or indefinite

connector in the accusative case. This situation is not present in English.

76

BIBLIOGRAPHY

1. Bantaş, Andrei, Elements of Descriptive English Syntax, Tipografia Universităţii

din Bucureşti, 1977.

2. Bantaş, Andrei, English for Advanced Students, Institiutul European, Iaşi 1993.

3. Bădescu, A., Gramatica limbii engleze, Editura Ştiinţifică, Bucureşti, 1963.

4. Beaumont, D., Granger, C., “The Heinemann ELT English Grammar. An

International Reference and Practic Book”, Macmillan 1998.

5. Clonţea, P., Miu, A., A Theoretical and Practical Guide to English Morphology

(Nomina), Editura Universităţii din Piteşti, 2004.

6. Collins, W., Collins Cobuild English Usage, Harper Collins Publishers, London,

1992.

7. Coe, N., Harrison, M., Paterson, K., Oxford Practice Grammar, Oxford,

University Press, 2006.

8. Cook, V., Newson, M., Chomsky’s Universal Grammar, An Introduction,

Blackwell Publishers, 1996.

9. Davies, W.D., Dubinsky, S., Grammar Functions, Functional categories and

Configurationality, Kluwer Academic Publishers, 2001.

10. Dixon, R.M.W., A Semantic Approach to English Grammar, Oxford University

Press, New York, 2005.

11. Downing, A., Locke, P., A University Course in English Grammar, Prentice

Hall, 1992.

12. Eastwood, J., Oxford Guide to English Grammar, Oxford University Press,

1994.

13. Eastwood, J., Oxford Practice Grammar with answers, Oxford University Press,

1999.

14. Graver, B.D, Advanced English Practice, Oxford Universitry Press, 1986.

15. Greenbaum. S., The Oxford English Grammar, Oxford University Press 1996.

77

16. Halliday, M., An Introduction to Functional Grammar, Third Edition,

Macquarie University, Australia.

17. Hornby, A. S., Oxford Advanced Learner’s Dictionary of Current English,

Oxford University Press, London, 1995.

18. Leech G., Denchar M., Hoogenraad R., English Grammar for Today – A New

Introduction, Second Edition, Macmillan.

19. Leviţchi, L., Curs de morfologia limbii engleze, Editura Didactică şi

Pedagogică, Bucureşti, 1962.

20. Leviţchi L., Preda I., Gramatica limbii engleze, Editura Stiinţifică, 1967.

21. Liles, B., A Basic Grammar of Modern English, Prentice Hall, Englewood

Cliffs, New Jersey, 1987.

22. LeTourneau M., English Grammar, Thomson, Wadsworth, 2001.

23. Marinescu, I., Radu I., Compendiu de Gramatică a limbii engleze, Institutul de

Petrol şi Gaze, Ploieşti, 1988.

24. Quirk, R., Greenbaum, S., A University Grammar of English, Longman,

London, 1973

25. Quirk, R., Greenbaum, S., Leech, G., Svartvik, J., a Grammar of Contemporary

English, Longman, London.

26. Paicu, A., Simion, O., Dicu, C., A Practical Course of English, Academia

Brâncuşi, Târgu Jiu, 2005.

27. Seely, J., Oxford A-Z of Grammar and Punctuation, Oxford University Press,

1994.

28. Silber, P., The Writer’s Grammar, Longman, 2004

29. Thomson, A.J., Martinet, A.V., A Practical English Grammar, Fourth Edition,

Oxford University Press, 1986.

30. Turcu, I.M., Gramatica limbii engleze, Corint, Bucureşti, 2005.

31. Vereş, G., Andriescu, I., Cehan, A., A Dictionarz of English Grammar, Polirom,

Editura Universităţii Al. I. Cuza, Iaşi, 1998.

32. Vlad, E., English Group Grammar, Longman, 2004.

78

33. Zdrenghea, M., Greere, L.A., A Practical English Grammar with exercises,

Second Edition, Clusium, 1999.

LITERARY WORKS CITED

1. Austen, Jane, Northanger Abbey, Penguin Books, 1994.

2. Austen, Jane, Emma, Penguin Books, 1994.

3. Bantaş, Clonţea, Brânzeu, Manual de literatură Engleză şi Americană, Teora,

1999.

4. Brontë, Charlotte, Jane Eyre, Penguin Books, 1994.

5. Brontë, Charlotte, Villette, Wordsworth Classics, 1994.

6. Conrad, Joseph, The Secret Agent, Penguin Books, 1994.

7. Conrad, Joseph, Typhoon, Penguin Books, 1995.

8. Cooper, F., J., The Last of the Mohicans, Penguin Books, 1994.

9. Dickens, Charles, Nicholas Nickleby, Wordsworth Classics, 1995.

10. Dickens, Charles, A Tale of Two Cities, Penguin Books, 1994.

11. Dickens, Charles, The Pickwick Papers, Penguin Books, 1994.

12. Hardy, Thomas, A Pair of Blue Eyes, Wordsworth Classics, 1995.

13. Hardy, Thomas, The Return of the Native, Wordsworth Classics, 1995.

14. Hardy, Thomas, Tess of the D’Urbevilles, Wordsworth Classics, 1995.

15. Lawrence, D. H., Sons and Lovers, Penguin Books, 1994.

16. London, Jack, White Fang and The call of the Wild, Penguin Books, 1994.

17. Shelley, Mary, Frankenstein, Penguin Books, 1994.

18. Wilde, Oscar, The Picture of Dorian Gray, Penguin Books, 1994.

79