General Forum
Start a New Topic 
Author
Comment
View Entire Thread
Re: Object complement, appositive or direct/indirect object

Paul, you are brilliant and have been a great help to me. Thanks!

I was racking my brain to find a sentence that best represented my dilemma (Object complement or indirect object) and all I could come up with was a verse from the Bible.

Would you break down the sentence grammatically for me, or allow me and correct me where I'm wrong?

God will provide himself a lamb for a burnt offering.

God - subject
will provide - verb
himself - indirect object - beneficiary/recipient of the direct object.
a lamb - direct object - thing acted upon by the verb, viz. God will provide what? - a lamb
for - preposition
a burnt offering - object of the preposition


Or am I completely off and the proper break down is:
God - subject
will provide - verb
himself - direct object (strange to me)
a lamb - object complement (property of the direct object - God [is] a lamb
for - preposition
a burnt offering - object of the preposition

Re: Object complement, appositive or direct/indirect object

The simple answer is that I’m not entirely sure how to analyse the sentence.

The problem with analysing passages from the Bible is that there can be a number of different interpretations, no less so with the passage you cited.

One translation sees it as "God himself will provide a lamb for a burnt offering", in which case there is only one object -- the direct object "a lamb". On this account, the reflexive pronoun "himself" is being used emphatically, i.e. it is an optional element.

On the other hand, some translations take it more literally, in which case "himself" is indirect object and "a lamb" is direct object.

To help you decide which translation is the more plausible, you may find these websites helpful:

http://www.biblestudytools.com/genesis/22-8-compare.html

https://www.timefortruth.co.uk/content/pages/documents/1351788556.pdf



PaulM

Re: Object complement, appositive or direct/indirect object

And with that you HAVE answered my question! One sentence can indeed be interpreted correctly in various manners - it could be emphatic, object complement or direct/indirect object depending upon the interpretation. You do allow the possibility of an object complement, where "himself" would be the direct object and "a lamb" would rename (or be a property of) the direct object, do you not?

Interestingly enough, I'm in discussion with Mr. Kinney (your second link) about this very subject!

Let me try to rephrase my original question. Can a sentence correctly have two or more structures (S-V-Io-Do, S-V-Do-OC, etc.) depending upon interpretation?

John will provide himself a lamb for a burnt offering.

Seems like this sentence cannot have an Object complement and must either be emphatic or indirect object/direct object. John is not a lamb.

John himself will provide a lamb.
John will provide [for] himself a lamb.
John is NOT a lamb. Object complement is not possible.

However, as you noted by putting God (Bible) into the discussion we now have three possibilities (if I understood your reply correctly).

God himself will provide a lamb.
God will provide [for] himself a lamb.
God is the lamb. Object complement.

If I have misunderstood something please correct me, otherwise, I'm extremely grateful for your time and patience. You have been a GREAT help!!! Thank you!

Re: Object complement, appositive or direct/indirect object

In other words does the grammar force the interpretation or does the interpretation reveal the grammar?

Re: Object complement, appositive or direct/indirect object

God will provide himself a lamb for a burnt offering.

Without changing the word order - the grammar structure is?
S-V-IO-DO-Prep-object of Prep.

or

S-V-DO-OC-Prep-Object of Prep.

OC - Object complement.