[Grammar] Do these three analyses make sense?

[Maggie Q]

He gave his daughter many gifts.

Question 1: In this case, both 'his daughter' and 'many gifts' are the verb complements completing the meaning of the verb 'gave,' right?


He gave many gifts to his daughter.

Question 2: In this case, the prepositional phrase 'to his daughter' functions as an object complement instead of an indirect object, right?

Question 3: Can we ALSO call 'to his daughter' the noun complement of the noun 'gifts?'

 

[PaulMatthews]

He gave his daughter many gifts.

Question 1: In this case, both 'his daughter' and 'many gifts' are the verb complements completing the meaning of the verb 'gave,' right?

Yes, "many gifts" is direct object and "his daughter" is indirect object. Objects are core complements.

He gave many gifts to his daughter.

Question 2: In this case, the prepositional phrase 'to his daughter' functions as an object complement instead of an indirect object, right?

No, the PP "to his daughter" is complement of "gave", but it is not predicative and hence not an object complement. Object complements ascribe some property to a direct object, e.g.' "I consider Ed highly untrustworthy", where the property of being highly untrustworthy is ascribed to the direct object Ed. Similarly in e.g., "They elected Kim President", where the property of being President is ascribed to Kim. Preposition phrases do not function as predicative complements.

Question 3: Can we ALSO call 'to his daughter' the noun complement of the noun 'gifts?'

No, it is a complement of the verb "gave", not the object "gifts". See answer to Q2.

 

[Maggie Q]

Yes, "many gifts" is direct object and "his daughter" is indirect object. Objects are core complements.

Thank you, PaulMatthews

Q 1: Here 'Objects are core complements.' refers to 'both 'his daughter (IO)' and 'many gifts(DO)' are complements of the verb "gave," right?

Q 2: Sorry, what the sentence element does 'to his daughter' function as in this case?

'The soldiers lay low to the ground.' --- Q 3: Does the following understanding make sense?

In this case, the prepositional phrase / the adverbial phrase 'to the ground' functions as an adjunct instead of an adverbial complement completing the meaning of the adverb 'low.' 'To the ground' functions as an adverbial of degree modifying the adverb 'low' (How low did the soldiers lie? To the ground). The whole phrase 'low to the ground' functions as an adverbial of place modifying the verb 'lay.' And we call 'the ground' the object of the preposition "to" or the prepositional complement of the preposition "to".​