Why are they thought of as 'indirect objects'?

[CSHY]

In an Oxford dictionary a sense given for the prepositon OF is:

Indicating the relationship between a verb and an indirect object-- with a verb expressing a mental state:

‘I don't know of anything that would be suitable’
‘I couldn't figure out a way to convince him of my love.’
‘they must be persuaded of the severity of the problem’

 

[PaulMatthews]

The dictionary is wrong in this instance. The complement of a preposition like "of" can never be an indirect object.

Thus the NPs "anything that would be suitable" / "my love" / "the severity of the problem" are not indirect objects, but complements of the preposition "of".

 

[TheParser]

NOT A TEACHER


Hello, C.S. Hy:

I cannot answer your question, but I have found some information that you can research further.

*****

1. "He bought a ball for his son."

a. "Grammarians differ about whether the noun in the prepositional phrase should be labelled indirect object."

Source: The Oxford Companion to the English Language (1992), pages 511 - 512.

2. "Dr. Jorgensen rarely gave high marks to students who did not attend her class regularly."

a. "Students" is an indirect object.

i. Explanation: Because "it names people who receive (or rather, don't receive in this particular instance) high marks, the direct object of gave."

3. "My lab partner takes the 13A bus to campus every day."

a. "Campus" in this example is NOT an indirect object because "it doesn't name something that can be understood to receive the direct object (bus) of the verb takes."

4. "What makes an object of a preposition an indirect object is whether we can think of it as receiving the direct object (and thus being indirectly or secondarily affected by the action the subject is described as undertaking)."

You can read the full explanation by going to Google and typing: Healthcare Writing (2016) Dr. Jespersen rarely gave

(You must then click on the "Books" section.)