1

This question is related to the idiom It took everything/all I had (within me)

Is it grammatically sound to place a second object after the verb TAKE? To clarify what I mean, below is the sentence I want to construct:

He was very aggressive. It took [two policemen] [everything they had] to subdue him

Or is it incorrect to do so?

He was very aggressive. It took [everything the two policemen had] to subdue him.

Please explain.

On top of that, I would like you to provide a link to a dictionary or an article for reference, preferrably to The Free Dictionary, but any would be helpful.

Many thanks in advance.

Improve this question
13
  • The first does sound more natural, but there's nothing wrong with the second grammatically.
    – Teacher KSHuang
    Commented Feb 23, 2017 at 10:37
  • Wait, did you mean everything/all cannot be an object?
    – Mohd Zulkanien Sarbini
    Commented Feb 23, 2017 at 10:37
  • @TeacherKSHuang You mean it took two policemen everything.. sounds natural?
    – Mohd Zulkanien Sarbini
    Commented Feb 23, 2017 at 10:39
  • 1
    Correct. "It took two policemen everything they had to subdue him" sounds like the more common construction of this idiom.
    – Teacher KSHuang
    Commented Feb 23, 2017 at 10:40
  • Yeah I should clarify that I meant object pronouns.
    – JUNCINATOR
    Commented Feb 23, 2017 at 10:40

1 Answer 1

Reset to default
1

He was very aggressive. It took [two policemen] [everything they had] to subdue him

This version implies inner qualities: emotions, feelings, judgment, physical strength, trainings, presence of spirit...

He was very aggressive. It took [everything the two policemen had] to subdue him.

This version implies clothes, wrist watches, jewelries, shoes, wallets...

Improve this answer

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .