0
  1. The principal gave Martha an award.
  2. The principal gave an award to Martha.

Many grammar sites (e.g. www.k12reader.com) say that Martha in the first sentence is an Indirect Object and Martha in the second sentence is an object of preposition.

If it is so, to Martha in the second sentence is a prepositional phrase. Then, my question is: what function does this prepositional phrase do in the sentence?

Improve this question
5
  • 1
    It is a complement of the verb gave: its function is identical to Martha in the first sentence. I would still call it an indirect object.
    – Colin Fine
    Commented May 16, 2020 at 7:48
  • @ColinFine, do you mean it takes a double role - the Indirect Object of the verb gave and the object of the preposition to?
    – mahmud k pukayoor
    Commented May 16, 2020 at 8:02
  • 1
    In your second example the preposition phrase "to Martha" functions not as indirect object but as complement of "gave".
    – BillJ
    Commented May 16, 2020 at 11:14
  • @BillJ thank you. If you post it as an answer, I will accept it.
    – mahmud k pukayoor
    Commented May 16, 2020 at 11:20
  • J Lawler states on ELU: ' "Indirect object" is an ill-defined term in English grammar ...' Different grammars (forget dictionaries!) use conflicting definitions. People tend to quote extracts from their favoured grammars as if there were a consensus on metalanguage.
    – Edwin Ashworth
    Commented Jan 15, 2023 at 19:58

1 Answer 1

Reset to default
2

[1] The principal gave Martha an award.

[2] The principal gave an award to Martha.

In [1] "Martha" is related directly to the verb "gave" and thus is the indirect object.

But in [2] "Martha" is related to the verb only indirectly, via the preposition "to", and thus is not an indirect object of the verb, but the object of the preposition "to". The PP "to Martha" functions as complement of "gave".

Improve this answer

You must log in to answer this question.

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