Object (grammar): Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Latest revision as of 05:02, 16 September 2024

In linguistics, an object is any of several types of arguments.^[1] In subject-prominent, nominative-accusative languages such as English, a transitive verb typically distinguishes between its subject and any of its objects, which can include but are not limited to direct objects,^[2] indirect objects,^[3] and arguments of adpositions (prepositions or postpositions); the latter are more accurately termed oblique arguments, thus including other arguments not covered by core grammatical roles, such as those governed by case morphology (as in languages such as Latin) or relational nouns (as is typical for members of the Mesoamerican Linguistic Area). In ergative-absolutive languages, for example most Australian Aboriginal languages, the term "subject" is ambiguous, and thus the term "agent" is often used instead to contrast with "object", such that basic word order is often spoken of in terms such as Agent-Object-Verb (AOV) instead of Subject-Object-Verb (SOV).^[4] Topic-prominent languages, such as Mandarin, focus their grammars less on the subject-object or agent-object dichotomies but rather on the pragmatic dichotomy of topic and comment.^[5]

Types

English

In English traditional grammar types, three types of object are acknowledged: direct objects, indirect objects, and objects of prepositions. These object types are illustrated in the following table:

Type	Example
Direct object	She sees the dog
Indirect object	I gave the man salt
Object of preposition	You fish for salmon

Indirect objects are frequently expressed as objects of prepositions, complicating the traditional typology; e.g. "I gave salt to the man."

Other languages

Some Chinese verbs can have two direct objects, one being more closely bound to the verb than the other; these may be called "inner" and "outer" objects.

Secundative languages lack a distinction between direct and indirect objects, but rather distinguish primary and secondary objects.^[6] Many African languages fall into this typological category.^[7]

Syntactic category

While the typical object is a pronoun, noun, or noun phrase, objects can also appear as other syntactic categories, as illustrated in the following table for the English language:

Category	Example
Noun (phrase) or pronoun	The girl ate fruit.
that-clause	We remembered that we had to bring something.
Bare clause	We remembered we had to bring something.
for-clause	We were waiting for him to explain.
Interrogative clause	They asked what had happened.
Free relative clause	I heard what you heard.
Gerund (phrase or clause)	He stopped asking questions.
to-infinitive	Sam attempted to leave.
Cataphoric it	I believe it that she said that.

Identification

A number of criteria can be employed for identifying objects, e.g.:^[8]

1. Subject of passive sentence: Most objects in active sentences can become the subject in the corresponding passive sentences.^[9]

2. Position occupied: In languages with strict word order, the subject and the object tend to occupy set positions in unmarked declarative clauses.

3. Morphological case: In languages that have case systems, objects are marked by certain cases (accusative, dative, genitive, instrumental, etc.).

Languages vary significantly with respect to these criteria. The first criterion identifies objects reliably most of the time in English, e.g.

Fred gave me a book.

a. A book was given (to) me.—Passive sentence identifies a book as an object in the starting sentence.

b. I was given a book.—Passive sentence identifies me as an object in the starting sentence.

The second criterion is also a reliable criterion for analytic languages such as English, since the relatively strict word order of English usually positions the object after the verb(s) in declarative sentences. In the majority of languages with fixed word order, the subject precedes the object. However, the opposite is true for the very small proportion (approximately 2.9%) of the world's languages that utilize object–subject word order by default.^[10]

Verb classes

Verbs can be classified according to the number and/or type of objects that they do or do not take. The following table provides an overview of some of the various verb classes:^[11]

Transitive verbs	Number of objects	Examples
Monotransitive	One object	I fed the dog.
Ditransitive	Two objects	You lent me a lawnmower.
Tritransitive	Three objects	I'll trade you this bicycle for your binoculars.^[12]
Intransitive verbs	Semantic role of subject	Examples
Unaccusative	Patient	The man stumbled twice, The roof collapsed.
Unergative	Agent	He works in the morning, They lie often.

Ergative^[13] and object-deletion verbs^[14] can be transitive or intransitive, as indicated in the following table:

Transitive	Example
Ergative	The submarine sank the freighter.
Object deletion	We have already eaten dinner.
Intransitive	Example
Ergative	The freighter sank.
Object deletion	We have already eaten.

The distinction drawn here between ergative and object-deletion verbs is based on the role of the subject. The object of a transitive ergative verb is the subject of the corresponding intransitive ergative verb. With object-deletion verbs, in contrast, the subject is consistent regardless of whether an object is or is not present.

In sentence structure

Objects are distinguished from subjects in the syntactic trees that represent sentence structure. The subject appears (as high or) higher in the syntactic structure than the object. The following trees of a dependency grammar illustrate the hierarchical positions of subjects and objects:^[15]

The subject is in blue, and the object in orange. The subject is consistently a dependent of the finite verb, whereas the object is a dependent of the lowest non-finite verb if such a verb is present.

Notes

^ For descriptions of the traditional distinction between subject and object, see for instance Freeborn (1995:31) and Kesner Bland (1996:415).
^ "What is a Direct Object?". Glossary of Linguistic Terms. Summer Institute of Linguistics. 3 December 2015. Retrieved 14 March 2020.
^ "What is an Indirect Object?". Summer Institute of Linguistics. 3 December 2015. Retrieved 14 March 2020.
^ Deal, Amy Rose (2016). "Syntactic Ergativity: Analysis and Identification". Annual Review of Linguistics. 2: 165–185. doi:10.1146/annurev-linguistics-011415-040642.
^ Dikken, Marcel den (2003-12-29). "A comment on the topic of topic–comment". Lingua. 115 (5): 691–710. doi:10.1016/j.lingua.2003.11.005.
^ Klamer, Marian; Schapper, Antoinette (2012). "'Give' Constructions in the Papuan Languages of Timor -Alor-Pantar". Linguistic Discovery. 10 (3). doi:10.1349/PS1.1537-0852.A.421.
^ Dryer, Matthew S. (December 1986). "Primary Objects, Secondary Objects, and Antidative". Language. 62 (4): 808–845. doi:10.2307/415173. JSTOR 415173.
^ See Biber et al. (1999:126) for a similar list of characteristics that identify (direct) objects.
^ Concerning the passive as a diagnostic for identifying objects, see for instance Freeborn (1995:175) and Biber et al. (1999:126).
^ Dryer, Matthew S. (2013). "Order of Subject, Object and Verb". In Dryer, Matthew S.; Haspelmath, Martin (eds.). The World Atlas of Language Structures Online. Leipzig: Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology.
^ For a classification of transitive verbs along the lines used here but using different terminology, see for instance Conner (1968:103ff.).
^ Mita, Ryohei (2009). "On Tritransitive Verbs". In John Ole Askedal (ed.). Germanic Languages and Linguistic Universals. The development of the Anglo-Saxon language and linguistic universals, 1. John Benjamins Publishing. pp. 121–. ISBN 978-90-272-1068-5. OCLC 901653606. Retrieved 22 July 2019. quoting Huddleston, Rodney; Pullum, Geoffrey K. (15 April 2002). The Cambridge Grammar of the English Language. Cambridge University Press. p. 219. ISBN 978-0-521-43146-0. OCLC 1109226511. Retrieved 22 July 2019.
^ Concerning ergative verbs, see for instance the Collins Cobuild English Grammar (1995:155f.) and Biber et al. (1999:155f.).
^ The term object-deletion verb is adopted from Biber et al. (1999:147). Such verbs are also called ambitransitive.
^ Dependency trees similar to the ones produced here can be found in Ágel et al. (2003/6).

Literature

Ágel, V., L. Eichinger, H.-W. Eroms, P. Hellwig, H. Heringer, and H. Lobin (eds.) 2003/6. Dependency and valency: An international handbook of contemporary research. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter.
Biber, D. et al. 1999. Longman Grammar of spoken and written English. Essex, England: Pearson Education limited.
Carnie, A. 2013. Syntax: A generative introduction, 3rd edition. Malden, MA: Wiley-Blackwell.
Collins Cobuild English Grammar 1995. London: HarperCollins Publishers.
Conner, J. 1968. A grammar of standard English. Boston: Houghton Mifflin Company.
Freeborn, D. 1995. A course book in English grammar: Standard English and the dialects, 2nd edition. London: MacMillan Press LTD.
Keenan, E. and B. Comrie 1977. Noun phrase accessibility and universal grammar. Linguistic Inquiry 8. 63–99.
Kesner Bland, S. Intermediate grammar: From form to meaning and use. New York: Oxford University Press.

External links

Direct Objects at chompchomp.com

[1] For descriptions of the traditional distinction between subject and object, see for instance Freeborn (1995:31) and Kesner Bland (1996:415).

[2] "What is a Direct Object?". Glossary of Linguistic Terms. Summer Institute of Linguistics. 3 December 2015. Retrieved 14 March 2020.

[3] "What is an Indirect Object?". Summer Institute of Linguistics. 3 December 2015. Retrieved 14 March 2020.

[4] Deal, Amy Rose (2016). "Syntactic Ergativity: Analysis and Identification". Annual Review of Linguistics. 2: 165–185. doi:10.1146/annurev-linguistics-011415-040642.

[5] Dikken, Marcel den (2003-12-29). "A comment on the topic of topic–comment". Lingua. 115 (5): 691–710. doi:10.1016/j.lingua.2003.11.005.

[6] Klamer, Marian; Schapper, Antoinette (2012). "'Give' Constructions in the Papuan Languages of Timor -Alor-Pantar". Linguistic Discovery. 10 (3). doi:10.1349/PS1.1537-0852.A.421.

[7] Dryer, Matthew S. (December 1986). "Primary Objects, Secondary Objects, and Antidative". Language. 62 (4): 808–845. doi:10.2307/415173. JSTOR 415173.

[8] See Biber et al. (1999:126) for a similar list of characteristics that identify (direct) objects.

[9] Concerning the passive as a diagnostic for identifying objects, see for instance Freeborn (1995:175) and Biber et al. (1999:126).

[Dryer2013Chap81-10] Dryer, Matthew S. (2013). "Order of Subject, Object and Verb". In Dryer, Matthew S.; Haspelmath, Martin (eds.). The World Atlas of Language Structures Online. Leipzig: Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology.

[11] For a classification of transitive verbs along the lines used here but using different terminology, see for instance Conner (1968:103ff.).

[Askedal-2009-12] Mita, Ryohei (2009). "On Tritransitive Verbs". In John Ole Askedal (ed.). Germanic Languages and Linguistic Universals. The development of the Anglo-Saxon language and linguistic universals, 1. John Benjamins Publishing. pp. 121–. ISBN 978-90-272-1068-5. OCLC 901653606. Retrieved 22 July 2019. quoting Huddleston, Rodney; Pullum, Geoffrey K. (15 April 2002). The Cambridge Grammar of the English Language. Cambridge University Press. p. 219. ISBN 978-0-521-43146-0. OCLC 1109226511. Retrieved 22 July 2019.

[13] Concerning ergative verbs, see for instance the Collins Cobuild English Grammar (1995:155f.) and Biber et al. (1999:155f.).

[14] The term object-deletion verb is adopted from Biber et al. (1999:147). Such verbs are also called ambitransitive.

[15] Dependency trees similar to the ones produced here can be found in Ágel et al. (2003/6).

[1]

[2]

[3]

[4]

[5]

[6]

[7]

[8]

[9]

[10]

[11]

[12]

[13]

[14]

[15]

@@ Line 1: / Line 1: @@
+{{short description|Grammatical concept}}
+{{Grammatical categories}}
 {{linguistics}}
+In [[linguistics]], an '''object''' is any of several types of [[Argument (linguistics)|arguments]].<ref>For descriptions of the traditional distinction between subject and object, see for instance Freeborn (1995:31) and Kesner Bland (1996:415).</ref> In subject-prominent, [[nominative-accusative]] languages such as [[English language|English]], a [[transitive verb]] typically distinguishes between its [[Subject (linguistics)|subject]] and any of its objects, which can include but are not limited to direct objects,<ref>{{cite news |title=What is a Direct Object? |newspaper=Glossary of Linguistic Terms |date=3 December 2015 |url=https://glossary.sil.org/term/direct-object |publisher=Summer Institute of Linguistics |access-date=14 March 2020}}</ref> indirect objects,<ref>{{cite web |title=What is an Indirect Object? |date=3 December 2015 |url=https://glossary.sil.org/term/indirect-object |publisher=Summer Institute of Linguistics |access-date=14 March 2020}}</ref> and arguments of adpositions ([[Preposition and postposition|prepositions or postpositions]]); the latter are more accurately termed ''oblique arguments'', thus including other arguments not covered by core grammatical roles, such as those governed by [[Grammatical case|case morphology]] (as in languages such as [[Latin]]) or [[relational noun]]s (as is typical for members of the [[Mesoamerican Linguistic Area]]).
-In [[linguistics]], the '''object''' of a [[transitive verb]] is one of its core [[verb argument|argument]]s, which generally represents the target of the verb's action or the undergoer of its effects. In more general terms, an object is a [[patient (grammar)|patient]].
+In [[ergative-absolutive]] languages, for example most [[Australian Aboriginal languages]], the term "subject" is ambiguous, and thus the term "[[Agent (linguistics)|agent]]" is often used instead to contrast with "object", such that basic word order is often spoken of in terms such as Agent-Object-Verb (AOV) instead of [[Subject-Object-Verb]] (SOV).<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Deal |first1=Amy Rose |title=Syntactic Ergativity: Analysis and Identification |journal=Annual Review of Linguistics |date=2016 |volume=2 |pages=165–185 |doi=10.1146/annurev-linguistics-011415-040642|doi-access=free }}</ref> [[Topic-prominent language]]s, such as [[Mandarin Chinese|Mandarin]], focus their grammars less on the subject-object or agent-object dichotomies but rather on the [[Pragmatics|pragmatic]] dichotomy of [[topic and comment]].<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Dikken |first1=Marcel den |title=A comment on the topic of topic–comment |journal=Lingua |date=2003-12-29 |volume=115 |issue=5 |pages=691–710 |doi=10.1016/j.lingua.2003.11.005}}</ref>
+==Types==
-Verbs with no object (as in the sentence "I run") are called [[intransitive verb|intransitive verbs]]. Those which do take objects are called [[transitive verb]]s. Transitive verbs which take only one object are known as [[monotransitive verb|monotransitive]]. [[Ditransitive]] verbs have two objects, a [[patient (grammar)|patient]] and a [[recipient (grammar)|recipient]]. ''See [[thematic role]].''
+===English===
-The following [[monotransitive verb]]s have [[direct object]]s marked in '''bold''':
+In English traditional grammar types, three types of object are acknowledged: ''direct objects'', ''indirect objects'', and ''objects of prepositions''. These object types are illustrated in the following table:
+{| class="wikitable"
-:She ate '''the apple'''.
+|-
-:The philosophers discussed '''their theories'''.
+! Type !! Example
+|-
+| Direct object || She sees ''the dog''
+|-
+| Indirect object || I gave  ''the man'' salt
+|-
+| Object of preposition || You fish ''for salmon''
+|}
+Indirect objects are frequently expressed as objects of prepositions, complicating the traditional typology; e.g. "I gave salt ''to the man''."
-In [[inflected language]]s, objects may be marked using [[morphology (linguistics)|morphological]] [[grammatical case|case]]. In many languages, the patient of a ditransitive verb is marked in the same way as the single object of a monotransitive verb, and is called the [[direct object]]. The recipient has its own marking, and is called the [[indirect object]]. In [[Latin language|Latin]], the direct object is marked by the [[accusative case]], while the indirect object is typically marked by the [[dative case]].
+===Other languages===
-In more [[isolating language]]s such as [[English language|English]], objects are marked by their position in the sentence or using [[adposition]]s (like ''to'' in ''I gave a book to him''). Modern English preserves a case distinction for pronouns, but it has conflated the accusative and the dative into a single [[objective pronoun|objective form]] (''him, her, me'', etc., which may function either as direct or indirect objects).
+Some [[Chinese language|Chinese]] verbs can have two direct objects, one being more closely bound to the verb than the other; these may be called [[Chinese grammar#Objects|"inner" and "outer" objects]].
-In some languages, the recipient of a ditransitive verb is marked in the same way as the single object of a monotransitive verb, and is called the '''primary object'''. The patient of ditransitive verbs has its own marking, and is called the '''secondary object'''. Such languages are called [[dechticaetiative language]]s, and are mostly found among [[African language]]s. Some claim that [[English language|English]] is also dechticaetiative, for example in the following sentences:
+[[Secundative language]]s lack a distinction between direct and indirect objects, but rather distinguish primary and secondary objects.<ref>{{Cite journal |last1=Klamer |first1=Marian |last2=Schapper |first2=Antoinette |date=2012 |title='Give' Constructions in the Papuan Languages of Timor -Alor-Pantar |journal=Linguistic Discovery |volume=10 |issue=3 |doi=10.1349/PS1.1537-0852.A.421 |doi-access=free}}</ref> Many African languages fall into this typological category.<ref>{{Cite journal |last=Dryer |first=Matthew S. |date=December 1986 |title=Primary Objects, Secondary Objects, and Antidative |journal=Language |volume=62 |issue=4 |pages=808–845 |doi=10.2307/415173 |jstor=415173 }}</ref>
-:His colleagues gave '''him''' ''a present''.
-:I sent '''my mother''' ''a card''.
+==Syntactic category==
-An object can be turned into a [[syntax|syntactic]] [[subject (grammar)|subject]] using [[passive voice]], if the language in question has such a construction. In dative languages, the direct object is promoted, while in dechticaetiative languages the primary object is promoted.
+While the typical object is a pronoun, noun, or noun phrase, objects can also appear as other [[syntactic category|syntactic categories]], as illustrated in the following table for the [[English language]]:
+:::::{| class="wikitable"
-In the immense majority of languages, where there is a preferred word order in the sentence, the object is placed somewhere after the subject. [[Analytic language]]s additionally tend to place the object after the verb, so that it remains separate from the subject.
+|-
+! Category !!  Example
+|-
+| Noun (phrase) or pronoun || The girl ate '''fruit'''.
+|-
+| ''that''-clause || We remembered '''that we had to bring something'''.
+|-
+| Bare clause || We remembered '''we had to bring something'''.
+|-
+| ''for''-clause || We were waiting '''for him to explain'''.
+|-
+| Interrogative clause || They asked '''what had happened'''.
+|-
+| Free relative clause || I heard '''what you heard'''.
+|-
+| Gerund (phrase or clause) || He stopped '''asking questions'''.
+|-
+| ''to''-infinitive || Sam attempted '''to leave'''.
+|-
+| [[Cataphor]]ic ''it'' || I believe '''it''' that she said that.
+|}
+==Identification==
+A number of criteria can be employed for identifying objects, e.g.:<ref>See Biber et al. (1999:126) for a similar list of characteristics that identify (direct) objects.</ref>
+::1. Subject of passive sentence: Most objects in active sentences can become the subject in the corresponding passive sentences.<ref>Concerning the passive as a diagnostic for identifying objects, see for instance Freeborn (1995:175) and Biber et al. (1999:126).</ref>
+::2. Position occupied: In languages with strict [[word order]], the subject and the object tend to occupy set positions in unmarked declarative clauses.
+::3. Morphological case: In languages that have case systems, objects are marked by certain cases (accusative, dative, genitive, instrumental, etc.).
+Languages vary significantly with respect to these criteria. The first criterion identifies objects reliably most of the time in English, e.g.
+::Fred gave me a book.
+::a. A book was given (to) me.<small>—Passive sentence identifies ''a book'' as an object in the starting sentence.</small>
+::b. I was given a book.<small>—Passive sentence identifies ''me'' as an object in the starting sentence.</small>
+The second criterion is also a reliable criterion for [[analytic language]]s such as English, since the relatively strict word order of English usually positions the object after the verb(s) in declarative sentences. In the majority of languages with fixed word order, the subject precedes the object. However, the opposite is true for the very small proportion (approximately 2.9%) of the world's languages that utilize [[object–subject word order]] by default.<ref name=Dryer2013Chap81>{{cite book |last1=Dryer |first1=Matthew S.|author-link=Matthew Dryer |year=2013 |chapter=Order of Subject, Object and Verb |editor1-last=Dryer |editor1-first=Matthew S. |editor2-last=Haspelmath |editor2-first=Martin |title=The World Atlas of Language Structures Online |location=Leipzig |publisher=Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology |chapter-url=http://wals.info/chapter/81 }}</ref>
+==Verb classes==
+Verbs can be classified according to the number and/or type of objects that they do or do not take. The following table provides an overview of some of the various verb classes:<ref>For a classification of transitive verbs along the lines used here but using different terminology, see for instance Conner (1968:103ff.).</ref>
+:::::{| class="wikitable"
+|-
+! Transitive verbs !!  Number of objects !! Examples
+|-
+| Monotransitive || One object || I '''fed''' the dog.
+|-
+| Ditransitive || Two objects || You '''lent''' me a lawnmower.
+|-
+| Tritransitive || Three objects || I'll '''trade''' you this bicycle for your binoculars.<ref name="Askedal-2009">{{cite book |last=Mita |first=Ryohei |editor=John Ole Askedal |title=Germanic Languages and Linguistic Universals |chapter-url=https://books.google.com/books?id=WuD2Szy3TG4C&pg=PA121 |series=The development of the Anglo-Saxon language and linguistic universals, 1 |year=2009 |publisher=John Benjamins Publishing |isbn=978-90-272-1068-5 |pages=121– |chapter=On Tritransitive Verbs |oclc=901653606 |access-date=22 July 2019}} quoting {{cite book |last1=Huddleston |first1=Rodney |last2=Pullum |first2=Geoffrey K. <!--|coauthors=Laurie Bauer--> |title=The Cambridge Grammar of the English Language |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=2yoQhHikxE8C |date=15 April 2002 |publisher=Cambridge University Press |page=219 |isbn=978-0-521-43146-0 |oclc=1109226511 |access-date=22 July 2019}}</ref>
+|-
+! Intransitive verbs !!  Semantic role of subject !! Examples
+|-
+| [[Unaccusative verb|Unaccusative]] || Patient || The man '''stumbled''' twice, The roof '''collapsed'''.
+|-
+| [[Unergative verb|Unergative]] || Agent || He '''works''' in the morning, They '''lie''' often.
+|}
+[[Ergative verb|Ergative]]<ref>Concerning ergative verbs, see for instance the Collins Cobuild English Grammar (1995:155f.) and Biber et al. (1999:155f.).</ref> and object-deletion verbs<ref>The term ''object-deletion verb'' is adopted from Biber et al. (1999:147). Such verbs are also called ''ambitransitive''.</ref> can be transitive or intransitive, as indicated in the following table:
+::::::::::{| class="wikitable"
+|-
+! Transitive !! Example
+|-
+| Ergative || The submarine '''sank''' the freighter.
+|-
+| Object deletion || We have already '''eaten''' dinner.
+|-
+! Intransitive !! Example
+|-
+| Ergative || The freighter '''sank'''.
+|-
+| Object deletion || We have already '''eaten'''.
+|}
+The distinction drawn here between ergative and object-deletion verbs is based on the role of the subject. The object of a transitive ergative verb is the subject of the corresponding intransitive ergative verb. With object-deletion verbs, in contrast, the subject is consistent regardless of whether an object is or is not present.
+==In sentence structure==
+Objects are distinguished from subjects in the syntactic trees that represent sentence structure. The subject appears (as high or) higher in the syntactic structure than the object. The following trees of a [[dependency grammar]] illustrate the hierarchical positions of subjects and objects:<ref>Dependency trees similar to the ones produced here can be found in Ágel et al. (2003/6).</ref>
+::[[File:Grammatical_objects.svg|Grammatical objects]]
+The subject is in blue, and the object in orange. The subject is consistently a dependent of the [[finite verb]], whereas the object is a dependent of the lowest [[non-finite verb]] if such a verb is present.
 ==See also==
+{{div col|colwidth=22em}}
-*[[Declension]]
-*[[Declension in English]]
+*[[Subject (grammar)]]
+*[[Predicate (grammar)]]
+*[[Dependency grammar]]
+*[[Object pronoun]]
+*[[Prepositional pronoun]]
+*[[Transitive verb]]
+*[[Intransitive verb]]
+*[[Oblique case]]
+*[[Differential object marking]]
+*[[Subject–verb inversion in English]]
+*[[Predicate (grammar)|predication]]
+*[[predicand]]
+*[[Raising (syntax)|raising]]
+{{div col end}}
+==Notes==
+{{reflist|2}}
+==Literature==
+{{div col|colwidth=30em}}
+*Ágel, V., L. Eichinger, H.-W. Eroms, P. Hellwig, H. Heringer, and H. Lobin (eds.) 2003/6. Dependency and valency: An international handbook of contemporary research. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter.
+*Biber, D. et al. 1999. Longman Grammar of spoken and written English. Essex, England: Pearson Education limited.
+*Carnie, A. 2013. Syntax: A generative introduction, 3rd edition. Malden, MA: Wiley-Blackwell.
+*Collins Cobuild English Grammar 1995. London: HarperCollins Publishers.
+*Conner, J. 1968. A grammar of standard English. Boston: Houghton Mifflin Company.
+*Freeborn, D. 1995. A course book in English grammar: Standard English and the dialects, 2nd edition. London: MacMillan Press LTD.
+*Keenan, E. and B. Comrie 1977. Noun phrase accessibility and universal grammar. Linguistic Inquiry 8. 63–99.
+*Kesner Bland, S. Intermediate grammar: From form to meaning and use. New York: Oxford University Press.
+{{div col end}}
+==External links==
-[[Category:Grammar]]
+*[http://www.chompchomp.com/terms/directobject.htm Direct Objects] at [http://www.chompchomp.com chompchomp.com]
-[[Category:Syntax]]
-[[Category:Linguistics]]
+{{DEFAULTSORT:Object (grammar)}}
-[[ca:Complement directe]]
+[[Category:Syntactic entities]]
-[[de:Objekt (Grammatik)]]
-[[eo:Objekto (gramatiko)]]
-[[ja:目的語]]
-[[nl:Object (grammatica)]]
-[[pl:Dopełnienie (gramatyka)]]