Second direct object, appositive? ''all of them"

< Previous | Next >

EnglishABC

Senior Member
NZ English
I licked her sweet tears, all of them.

Do you accept this?

The underlined phrase appears to me to be a second direct object.
But then I wonder if that's correct: it must have some relation to the first, italicised direct object as 'them' refers to the sweet tears.

Cheers
 
  • owlman5

    Senior Member
    English-US
    I sure do, English ABC. I don't see it as a second direct object, but rather as an amplification or explanation of "her sweet tears". I'd also punctuate this with a comma, as you have done, though using a dash here also seems possible.
     

    EnglishABC

    Senior Member
    NZ English
    Hi, owlman5

    Yeah, there is no denying its correctness (unsure why I asked the first question), but the anlysis of of it, I was a little unsure about.

    As stated in my thread Title, I believed it to be a second direct object or appositive. I was on the fence as to which it was, as both seemed plausible, but both seemed equally implausible too.

    The reason I thought it wasn't an amplification was because I recalled reading an article a while back discussing appositives, in which it stated that appositives are simply relative clauses with the relative pronoun and the verb to be (The house, which is/was are etc) removed. And I basically don't see the version with the pronoun and verb to be making any sense... Maybe the article was wrong???

    Cheers
     

    owlman5

    Senior Member
    English-US
    I agree that it is appositive to the extent that it is a restatement of the original noun phrase, but I don't really see that as true second object. Rather than saying "I licked all her sweet tears", you have written I licked her sweet tears, all of them.

    If I thought "all of them" were truly a second direct object, I'd have to find it impossible to fuse it into one object phrase, which is easy to do: I licked all her sweet tears. Perhaps some other member will agree with your analysis of this phrase as a second direct object, but I don't. Now, enough tear-licking for me. Have fun with your analysis. :)
     
    < Previous | Next >
    Top