Question!

[Taka]

Originally Posted by tdol

In 'I found myself a smooth rock', I wouldn't take that as emphasis, but meaning 'for myself' rtaher than 'by myself'. ;-)

Whether it's emphasis or meaning "for myself", it's an adverb, not an indirect object, and that is my point.

Originally Posted by Taka

Whether it's emphasis or meaning "for myself", it's an adverb, not an indirect object, and that is my point.

Is there any reason why a reflexive pronoun cannot appear as the indirect object of "find"?

[Casiopea]

Originally Posted by Taroimo

... in the case of potentially ditransitive verbs, there are two subcases: an emphatic reflexive and a reflexive indirect object.

Nicely and succinctly put, Tarimo. 8)

P.S. Is 'mono' (i.e. monotransitive) needed? If so, why?

[Tdol]

Originally Posted by Taka

Whether it's emphasis or meaning "for myself", it's an adverb, not an indirect object, and that is my point.

I didn't mean to imply that it was an indirect object.

[Taka]

Originally Posted by Taroimo

Is there any reason why a reflexive pronoun cannot appear as the indirect object of "find"?

What Casiopea and tdol said:

Originally Posted by Casiopea

since 'myself' can be moved around the sentence, it couldn't be an object

Originally Posted by tdol

If you put the word next to the subject and it makes sense, it's emphatic:

I myself found a rock. (emphasising my amazing personal qualities)

I myself gave a manicure. (to whom?)

Using my own words, I should say the reflexive in "I found myself a rock" is not significant:unlike the case of "give", there is not much semantic difference between with and without the reflexive in the case of "find".

It is not surprising at all that you still cannot cross out the possibility that it is an indirect object, because even to some native speakers here it actually seems so. And if you'd like to think that way, that's fine.

However, through the process of inductive reasoning, I think it should be adverbial.

[Taka]

Originally Posted by tdol

I didn't mean to imply that it was an indirect object.

I know, tdol.

Thank you!!

[RonBee]

Originally Posted by Taroimo

You are not the only one on this. Some speakers seem not to allow emphatic "myself" (marked by intonation breaks) to intervene between the verb and its object like "I found--myself--a smooth rock" (dashes mean intonation breaks). You don't accept "I saw--myself--the accident" either, so your judgments are quite consistent. :wink:

Taroimo

I wouldn't use myself in that position either. It is at best ambiguous.

:)

[RonBee]

Say:

• I hope I made sense.

Or:

• I hope that makes sense.

:)

Originally Posted by Casiopea

Nicely and succinctly put, Tarimo. 8)

P.S. Is 'mono' (i.e. monotransitive) needed? If so, why?

Thank you. :D

Re. "mono", I thought that, in the "transitive" v. "intransitve" dichotomy, "transitive" could mean both "monotransitive" and "ditransitive". I just wanted to avoid potential ambiguity.

Taroimo

Originally Posted by RonBee

Say:

• I hope I made sense.

Or:

• I hope that makes sense.

:)

...as opposed to "I hope I make sense", right?

Thank you for your advice.

Can I ask a question related to this?

I could be wrong, but I think I've heard people say, "Do I make sense?" Would it be ok to say so in my case? Or should I say, "Did I make sense?"?

Taroimo