# μου αρέσει - μου πάει - μου λείπει



## larshgf

μου αρέσει - μου πάει - μου λείπει

With some verbs modern greek use a kind of "inverted word order" in the sentence: 

μου αρέσει να ταξιδέψω
της πάει το φόρεμα
του λείπει η γυναίκα του

What do you call this grammatical phenomenon? Apart from the above mentioned, do you hae other examples of verbs behaving like this?


----------



## διαφορετικός

Why do you think that it is "inverted"? What would be the "normal word order"?


----------



## διαφορετικός

Maybe you mean the following:
το να ταξιδέψω μου αρέσει (I think this is correct, but not without the "το")
το φόρεμα της πάει
η γυναίκα του του λείπει


----------



## larshgf

διαφορετικός said:


> Why do you think that it is "inverted"? What would be the "normal word order"?


For instance "μου αρέσει το φαγητό".  It means "the food pleases me",  but we normaly translate it "I like the food"
I dont know how to explain it, but somehow (I think) these three verbs behave a bit different than other verbs?


----------



## διαφορετικός

larshgf said:


> For instance "μου αρέσει το φαγητό". It means "the food pleases me", but we normaly translate it "I like the food"


In this example, subject and object are inverted (exchanged for each other), if you compare Greek to English. How would you translate the other two examples to English?


----------



## Perseas

I think the verb "μου πάει" (e.g. for a cloth) has an equivalent structure in English: "it suits me".


----------



## Perseas

larshgf said:


> For instance "μου αρέσει το φαγητό".  It means "the food pleases me",  but we normaly translate it "I like the food"
> I dont know how to explain it, but somehow (I think) these three verbs behave a bit different than other verbs?


Also, German has equivalent structures for "μου αρέσει" (X gefällt mir) and "μου λείπει" (X fehlt mir). Is Danish different from German on that issue?


----------



## διαφορετικός

Perseas said:


> German has equivalent structures for "μου αρέσει" (X gefällt mir) and "μου λείπει" (X fehlt mir).


Yes, and "της πάει" = "steht ihr".


----------



## larshgf

In the metioned sentences I think you use these 3 verbs as impersonal verbs.
In danish we usually dont use the order of words like that. We say (translated to english):
- I like the food (not "the food pleases me")
- the dress fits the lady (not "the dress goes to her")
- he miss his wife (not "his wife is gone to him")
I think I have to explore a bit more in this issue so I can be dressed better to this discussion. Maybe I dont have a point at all ;-)


----------



## Perseas

larshgf said:


> In the metioned sentences I think you use these 3 verbs as impersonal verbs.


I understand what you mean, but no, the verbs are personal, i.e. their subjects are nouns or pronouns.

For example, the verb "αρέσω" has inverse structure from that of the verb "like". That is, the subject of "like" is the object of "αρέσω" and the object of "like" is the subject of "αρέσω".


----------



## larshgf

I had a (apparently) wrong idea about these verbs beeing impersonal because we only use them in the 3. person singularis and pluralis.
But I see what you mean.
Somehow I just feel that these 3 verbs (and maybe more that I dont know) syntactically behaves a bit special. I might be totally wrong?


----------



## διαφορετικός

larshgf said:


> Somehow I just feel that these 3 verbs (and maybe more thet I dont know) syntactically behaves a bit special. I might be totally wrong?


They have no direct object (αιτιατική), but only one in γενική. This is a little special. I think you can call them "intransitive" verbs.


----------



## Perseas

larshgf said:


> I had a (apparently) wrong idea about these verbs beeing impersonal because we only use them in the 3. person singularis and pluralis.
> But I see what you mean.


Της αρέσεις/λείπεις is 2nd person. The subject here is "εσύ". Another way of phrasing that is "Εσύ αρέσεις/λείπεις σ' αυτή".



larshgf said:


> Somehow I just feel that these 3 verbs (and maybe more thet I dont know) syntactically behaves a bit special. I might be totally wrong?


That's due to the structure of those verbs. You could say "αυτός τη συμπαθεί", for example, instead of "του αρέσει (αυτή)", although it's not absolutely the same.


----------



## Perseas

διαφορετικός said:


> They have no direct object (αιτιατική), but only one in γενική. This is a little special. I think you can call them "intransitive" verbs.


   Or you can use the structure with a preposition.
Αυτό μου αρέσει = Αυτό αρέσει σ' εμένα.
μου=σ' εμένα.


----------



## larshgf

Thank you διαφορετικός and Perseas for your help. I might return here with further.....


----------



## διαφορετικός

Perseas said:


> Or you can use the structure with a preposition.
> Αυτό μου αρέσει = Αυτό αρέσει σ' εμένα.
> μου=σ' εμένα.


Yes, I forgot to mention the fact that the πτώση αιτιατική alone is not enough to recognize a direct object: If it is combined with a preposition, it is not a direct object.

Is there a Greek word for "intransitive" in this sense? Some dictionaries indicate "αμετάβατος" as a translation, but the definition of "αμετάβατο ρήμα" here excludes objects of any kind, not only the direct objects.


----------



## Perseas

διαφορετικός said:


> Yes, I forgot to mention the fact that the πτώση αιτιατική alone is not enough to recognize a direct object: If it is combined with a preposition, it is not a direct object.
> 
> Is there a Greek word for "intransitive" in this sense? Some dictionaries indicate "αμετάβατος" as a translation, but the definition of "αμετάβατο ρήμα" here excludes objects of any kind, not only the direct objects.


In "μου αρέσει κάτι", the verb is not intransitive (αμετάβατο), since it has an object (μου), it's transitive (μεταβατικό). 




Perseas said:


> larshgf said:
> 
> 
> 
> I had a (apparently) wrong idea about these verbs beeing impersonal because we only use them in the 3. person singularis and pluralis.
> 
> 
> 
> Της αρέσεις/λείπεις is 2nd person. The subject here is "εσύ". Another way of phrasing that is "Εσύ αρέσεις/λείπεις σ' αυτή".
Click to expand...

In the third person singular (αρέσει), this verb can be used as impersonal, e.g. "μου αρέσει να κολυμπάω".


----------



## larshgf

διαφορετικός said:


> They have no direct object (αιτιατική), but only one in γενική. This is a little special. I think you can call them "intransitive" verbs.


In a grammar ("Greek - A Comprehensive Grammar") some of the verbs are mentioned in a paragraph titled "The genitive dependent on a verb" from where i quote:

"The genitive (usually a weak pronoun) is also used with certain verbs that do not take direct objects, such as αρέσω 'please', πάω 'suit' and φαίνομαι 'seem':
_Δεν μου αρέσει αυτό το κρασί_
'I don't like this wine'
_Σου πάει αυτή η φούστα_
'This skirt suits you'
_Δύσκολο μου φαίνεται_
'It seems difficult to me'

I found this paragraph last night and it seems to pinpoint what is all about. Now I just wonder if you have examples of other verbs that does not take direct object?


----------



## Helleno File

This is a very regular topic here, larshgf! We've all struggled with it! It's a difficulty for native English speakers - and obviously for Danes too, which I hadn't realised. (Nice to know we're not alone!  ) In fact the structure "it pleases me" exists in a number of European languages.  διαφορετικός has mentioned German but it is also true in French - "la robe me plaît". I'd be interested tο hear other examples. And classical Latin has "mihi placet".

Add to this the fact that the case structure of Greek allows a looser/less rigid structure (depending on your point of view). This includes what we would call "inversions" but are just normal language to a Greek. German speakers can cope with a structure SO.......V in a subordinate clause so this is nothing to them.  And finally pronouns _*always*_ come before the verb in Greek (except in the imperative) , as in French but unlike English and German - ?? Danish. This therefore doubles the illusion of inversion in our eyes!


----------



## διαφορετικός

Perseas said:


> In "μου αρέσει κάτι", the verb is not intransitive (αμετάβατο), since it has an object (μου), it's transitive (μεταβατικό).


Thank you. But the English word does not have this meaning. An "intransitive verb" does not have a direct object, but it can have indirect objects. (In German, "intransitives Verb" means the same as the English term.)


----------



## διαφορετικός

larshgf said:


> Now I just wonder if you have examples of other verbs that does not take direct object?


Probably most of them also don't have an indirect (genitive) object:
περπατώ - go for a walk
κοιμάμαι - sleep

I have found an example with genitive:
μου χαμογέλασε - (s)he smiled at me


----------



## Konstantinos

Similar in Russian: мне нравится = μου αρέσει = I like

Actually that is one point that I enjoy in both these languages... Εγώ συμπαθώ εσένα, εγώ θαυμάζω εσένα, εγώ γουστάρω εσένα αλλά..... εσύ μου αρέσεις.

Επί τη ευκαιρία, το "εγώ σου αρέσω", μπορεί να ειπωθεί κάπως έτσι: "εγώ αρέσομαι σε εσένα"; Δεν το λέμε στην Αθήνα, αλλά μήπως το λένε κάπου αλλού; Ή μήπως είναι αρχαία Ελληνικά; Ή απλά με παρασύρει σε ψευδαισθήσεις το αρέσκω - αρέσκομαι;


----------



## Perseas

διαφορετικός said:


> Thank you. But the English word does not have this meaning. An "intransitive verb" does not have a direct object, but it can have indirect objects. (In German, "intransitives Verb" means the same as the English term.)


Yes, I know. Also, if a verb takes two objects, one in dative and one in genitive (ancient Greek), we say that the genitive is the direct object.



διαφορετικός said:


> περπατώ - go for a walk
> κοιμάμαι - sleep


Those verbs we call intransitive.


----------



## διαφορετικός

Perseas said:


> Yes, I know.


I see, you use(d) the word "(in)transitive" for the ("Greek") meaning of "αμετάβατος / μεταβατικός". Obviously there are no other English or Greek words which could serve to distinguish the slightly different concepts.


----------



## Perseas

διαφορετικός said:


> I see, you use(d) the word "(in)transitive" for the ("Greek") meaning of "αμετάβατος / μεταβατικός".


Thanks for pointing it out. I should have explained that.


----------



## larshgf

διαφορετικός said:


> I see, you use(d) the word "(in)transitive" for the ("Greek") meaning of "αμετάβατος / μεταβατικός". Obviously there are no other English or Greek words which could serve to distinguish the slightly different concepts.





Perseas said:


> Thanks for pointing it out. I should have explained that.


Sorry - I did'nt catch this. Could you explain the difference between intransitive and αμετάβατος, and between transitive and  μεταβατικός?


----------



## διαφορετικός

larshgf said:


> Could you explain the difference between intransitive and αμετάβατος, and between transitive and μεταβατικός?


"English" meanings:
"transitive": "has a direct object"
"intransitive": "has no direct object"

"Greek" meanings:
"μεταβατικός": "has an object"
"αμετάβατος": "has no object"

Nevertheless, "transitive" and "intransitive" are translated as "μεταβατικός" and "αμετάβατος" (probably because they are very related, etymologically).


----------



## Perseas

Therefore, the German "gefallen" is intransitive, e.g. "das gefällt mir" (μου αρέσει/Ι like it), because "mir" is dative.
Is there a similar example in English? In this wikipedia article about intransitive verbs, all verbs that are intransitive in English are also in Greek intransitive and all verbs that are transitive in English are also in Greek transitive.
Intransitive verb - Wikipedia


----------



## διαφορετικός

Perseas said:


> all verbs that are intransitive in English are [...]


Again, I am not sure which kind of "intransitivity" you mean, the "English" oder the "Greek" one.
What about the example "μου χαμογέλασε - (s)he smiled at me"?


----------



## Perseas

διαφορετικός said:


> Again, I am not sure which kind of "intransitivity" you mean, the "English" oder the "Greek" one.
> What about the example "μου χαμογέλασε - (s)he smiled at me"?


I mean the common part. For example, "run" ("My dog ran.") is in both English and Greek intrasitive and "watch" ("We watched a movie last night.") is in both languages transitive.
Yes, "smile"/"χαμογελώ" is an example I was looking for. Thanks.


----------



## Tr05

larshgf said:


> μου αρέσει να ταξιδέψω





διαφορετικός said:


> το να ταξιδέψω μου αρέσει (I think this is correct, but not without the "το")



I hope I didn't miss any comment correcting this, but the only correct option after "μου αρέσει" (present tense) _is the present subjunctive, namely "Μου αρέσει να ταξιδεύω/να γράφω/να τρέχω..." and not the aorist subjunctive, "...να ταξιδέψω/να γράψω/να τρέξω..."._

Τhe latter is possible (along with the present subjunctive) in cases such as "Θα μου άρεσε να..." (="It would be nice to", "I would like to...", _conditional_), depending on what the speaker's intention is:

_"Θα μου άρεσε να ταξιδε*ύ*ω στο Μεξικό" (=I would like/It would be nice to travel to Mexico). _Some form of repetition is implied in this case (once in a while/every week/5 times a month/20 times a year)

_"Θα μου άρεσε να ταξιδέ*ψ*ω στο Μεξικό"_ (_="I would like/It would be nice to travel to Mexico")._ In this case, the action is treated as a one-off, as something that -eventually- will be concluded... _"It would be nice/I would like to go there once/twice/this summer/next year/in 10 years/in the summer and stay there for some time"._


----------



## ioanell

Hi, 


larshgf said:


> a kind of "inverted word order"



Obviously, larshgf has in mind the normal English (and probably Danish) word order with Subject-Predicate, whereas in Greek the word order is flexible and can be Predicate-Subject, depending on various factors, such as the most prominent element of the speech, whether the information given in the sentence is totally or partly new, the intonation etc.



larshgf said:


> - the dress fits the lady (not "the dress *goes to her*")
> - he miss his wife (not "his wife *is gone to him*")



Of course, the verb *πάει *in "της πάει το φόρεμα" doesn't have the meaning of "πηγαίνω/πάω" (to move or travel [from one place to another]), but the meaning of "ταιριάζω" (to fit). The verb *λείπει *in "του λείπει η γυναίκα του" means "is absent [to his discontent]", not necessarily meaning that his wife abandoned him; she may be away for various reasons.


----------



## ioanell

A direct object is not only in αιτιατική, but also in γενική, e.g. Ο Γιώργος μοιάζει *του πατέρα* μας (George resembles our father). Αυτό άπτεται *των ατομικών δικαιωμάτων *του (This has to do with his personal rights).



διαφορετικός said:


> the πτώση αιτιατική alone is not enough to recognize a direct object: If it is combined with a preposition, it is not a direct object.



_the πτώση αιτιατική alone is not enough to recognize a direct object_: What else do you think is needed along with αιτιατική to recognise it as a direct object?        
_If it is combined with a preposition, it is not a direct object._ This is correct.



διαφορετικός said:


> περπατώ - go for a walk



περπατώ = walk   go for a walk 



Helleno File said:


> And finally pronouns _*always*_ come before the verb in Greek (except in the imperative)



I can't see how you came to stress _*always*_, Ελληνοφάκελε. This is true only when the weak form of the personal pronoun is used as object of the verb. The strong form comes after the verb, unless you want to stress and contradistinguish the noun meant by it from another; in this case, it comes before the verb. The same happens in the imperative.


----------



## ioanell

διαφορετικός said:


> Is there a Greek word for "intransitive" in this sense? Some dictionaries indicate "αμετάβατος" as a translation, but the definition of "αμετάβατο ρήμα" here excludes objects of any kind, not only the direct objects.



Firstly, I apologize for the number of comments, but I didn’t happen to read the specific thread earlier.

Αγαπητέ διαφορετικέ,

Regarding Greek syntax, I hope the following will help eliminate a misunderstanding.

With impersonal verbs (like φαίνεται, χρειάζεται, πρέπει etc) and impersonal expressions (like είναι εύκολο, είναι δύσκολο, είναι αδύνατο etc), but also with intransitive [as here αρέσει is] and transitive verbs, a genitive of a noun or, usually, a personal pronoun, which is not their object, is often connected. It shows that a person emotionally participates in what the verb denotes or receives benefit or undergoes harm from what the sentence means and is called *γενική προσωπική* (=genitive personal). Because the emotions of this personal participation are usually joy/pleasure or discontent, benefit or harm, this genitive is called *γενική χαριστική* or *αντιχαριστική* accordinly (=freely translated as “genitive pleasing” or “harmful”). Consequently, this genitive as in "*Μου* αρέσει το φαγητό" should never be confused with an indirect object.

Indicative examples: Να *μου* φιλήσεις τα παιδιά. *Σου* χαϊδεύει ποτέ το κεφάλι η μαμά σου; *Μου* είναι δύσκολο να έρθω. -Η Μαρία αγόρασε καινούργιο φόρεμα. -Ναι, αλλά *της* είναι στενό. *Του* χάλασαν τα σχέδια. *Του* λείπει η γυναίκα του.

Note that this structure comes down from AG, where the dative case (as dative personal) had the place of the MG genitive, e.g. Ὡς καλός *μοι* ὁ πάππος (=What a handsome man -* for my pleasure*- my grandpa is!) Πᾶς ἀνὴρ *ἑαυτῷ* πονεῖ (=Every man strives *for himself*).

See Συντακτικό της Αρχαίας Ελληνικής, Α, Β, Γ Λυκείου, Α. Β. Μουμτζάκης
       Συντακτικό της Νέας Ελληνικής, Α, Β, Γ Γυμνασίου, Συντακτική Ομάδα
       Συνοπτική Γραμματική της Νέας Ελληνικής, Δομολειτουργική- Επικοινωνιακή,         Χρ. Κλαίρης-Γ. Μπαμπινιώτης


----------



## Perseas

ioanell said:


> [...]
> this genitive is called *γενική χαριστική* or *αντιχαριστική* accordinly (=freely translated as “genitive pleasing” or “harmful”).  Consequently, this genitive as in "*Μου* αρέσει το φαγητό" should never be confused with an indirect object.
> 
> [...]
> Συνοπτική Γραμματική της Νέας Ελληνικής, Δομολειτουργική- Επικοινωνιακή, Χρ. Κλαίρης-Γ. Μπαμπινιώτης


About the syntax of the verb "αρέσω:
In "Γραμματική της Νέας Ελληνικής" of Χρ. Κλαίρης-Γ. Μπαμπινιώτης" (2014: 608), there is the example "Αν *σου* αρέσουν τα θαλασσινά, έχει ένα καταπληκτικό ταβερνάκι στην παραλία", where the genitive "*σου*" is called *object*.


----------



## διαφορετικός

ioanell said:


> _the πτώση αιτιατική alone is not enough to recognize a direct object_: What else do you think is needed along with αιτιατική to recognise it as a direct object?
> _If it is combined with a preposition, it is not a direct object._ This is correct.


"What else is needed": I meant that which followed, also quoted by you: It must not be combined with a preposition.

On the other hand, you have explained that an object in genitive can also be called a direct object:


ioanell said:


> A direct object is not only in αιτιατική, but also in γενική, e.g. Ο Γιώργος μοιάζει *του πατέρα* μας (George resembles our father).


I did not know this. So how can we recognize a direct object (in modern Greek)?



ioanell said:


> περπατώ = walk  go for a walk


Yes, "walk" is the main meaning of περπατώ (but I think it can also mean "go for a walk" or "κάνω περίπατο", at least this dictionary says so).



ioanell said:


> Να *μου* φιλήσεις τα παιδιά.


Such expressions are also possible in German, although this example ("Küss mir die Kinder.") might sound a little outdated or maybe poetic.

Well, there seems to be a disagreement if "μου" in this example should be called an object.


----------



## Perseas

διαφορετικός said:


> Well, there seems to be a disagreement if "μου" in this example should be called an object.


In "Να μου φιλήσεις τα παιδιά",  "μου" is not an object, it's "γενική προσωπική" (genitive personal).
Also, in "Μου είναι αδύνατο να κάνω αυτό", "Να μου ταΐσεις το σκυλί".


----------



## διαφορετικός

Perseas said:


> In "Να μου φιλήσεις τα παιδιά", "μου" is not an object, it's "γενική προσωπική" (genitive personal).
> Also, in "Μου είναι αδύνατο να κάνω αυτό", "Να μου ταΐσεις το σκυλί".


Thank you, Perseas. So the disagreement concerns only "μου" in "μου αρέσει", doesn't it?


----------



## Perseas

διαφορετικός said:


> Thank you, Perseas. So the disagreement concerns only "μου" in "μου αρέσει", doesn't it?


According to CLAIRIS/BABINIOTIS  grammar, the verbs *αρέσω, μυρίζω, ανήκω, ταιριάζω, μοιάζω, etc*. take object in genitive (or a prepositional object).

Αυτό το ψάρι *μου* αρέσει.
*Μου* μυρίζει κάτι.
Αυτό* μου* ανήκει.
Ο Πέτρος μοιάζει *του πατέρα του*.
Αυτό το κουστούμι δεν *του* ταιριάζει.

In the following sentences the genitives are not objects, but genitives of person. (Some of these examples are from another book).
*Μου* τελείωσαν τα λεφτά.
*Του* τακτοποίησε το γραφείο.
Να *μου* φιλήσεις τα παιδιά.
*Μου* είναι αδύνατο να το κάνω αυτό.
*Σου* χαϊδεύει το κεφάλι.


----------



## διαφορετικός

Thank you for looking it up, Perseas.

I think I see the difference: In the second group of examples, the verb is not directly connected to the pronoun. The pronouns fit ioanell's description:


ioanell said:


> It shows that a person emotionally participates in what the verb denotes or receives benefit or undergoes harm from what the sentence means




In the example "σου δίνω τα κλειδιά", "σου" looks like "a person who receives benefit". But it is more "directly" connected to the verb, so it is called an "object", do you agree?


----------



## ioanell

διαφορετικός said:


> "What else is needed": I meant that which followed, also quoted by you: It must not be combined with a preposition.



To be frank, some modern grammars (among them Babiniotis's) also accept the structure "preposition + accusative" as direct object in a number of cases.



διαφορετικός said:


> On the other hand, you have explained that an object in genitive can also be called a direct object:



They have no direct object (αιτιατική), but only one in γενική.
Probably most of them also don't have an indirect (genitive) object:

Points like the above which might lead to a more general conclusion that the direct object is always in αιτιατική made necessary my pointing out that αιτιατική is not the only case in which the direct object can be; and I quoted the relevant examples. Direct objects in genitive are few in comparison with those in accusative, nevertheless they exist.



διαφορετικός said:


> So how can we recognize a direct object (in modern Greek)?




The object of the (monotransitive) verb is in the accusative.
The object of the (monotransitive) verb is in the genitive or it can alternatively be a prepositional phrase.
When the verb (ditransitive) has two objects, the one in the accusative case is the direct object. The indirect object is in the genitive case or it can alternatively be a prepositional phrase.
When the verb (ditransitive) has both its objects in the accusative case, the one denoting a person is the direct object. The indirect object denoting a thing is also in the accusative case or it can alternatively be a prepositional phrase.



διαφορετικός said:


> Yes, "walk" is the main meaning of περπατώ (but I think it can also mean "go for a walk" or "κάνω περίπατο", at least this dictionary says so).



In the case we are talking about, you skipped the first two meanings and jumped directly to the third one. I thought that this might be somewhat misleading for others who don’t know the language at the level you do. That was the meaning of my correction.



ioanell said:


> Να *μου* φιλήσεις τα παιδιά.





διαφορετικός said:


> Well, there seems to be a disagreement if "μου" in this example should be called an object.



This example was drawn unchanged directly from the Chapter “Γενική Προσωπική” of the Συντακτικό της Νέας Ελληνικής, Α, Β, Γ Γυμνασίου, του ΟΕΔΒ.


----------



## ioanell

Perseas said:


> About the syntax of the verb "αρέσω:
> In "Γραμματική της Νέας Ελληνικής" of Χρ. Κλαίρης-Γ. Μπαμπινιώτης" (2014: 608), there is the example "Αν *σου* αρέσουν τα θαλασσινά, έχει ένα καταπληκτικό ταβερνάκι στην παραλία", where the genitive "*σου*" is called *object*.



Thank you, Perseas. It is really quite strange that Babiniotis in his Dictionary (at least in two different editions I own) characterizes αρέσω as an intransitive verb, which means is has no object whatsoever, and in his Grammar as a transitive one, which of course has an object.
Unfortunately, the photo showing the relevant entry of the dictionary can't be uploaded due to its large size, as the system says.


----------



## διαφορετικός

Thanks a lot for your explanations, ioanell.

In German, it is simple (as far as I know): the direct object is the one in accusative, without preposition. In Greek, it seems more complicated. The direct object appears in different shapes (cases, and sometimes with prepositions). This leads me to the question: _Why_ do we distinguish "direct" from "indirect" objects at all? (I cannot answer this question even for the German language or grammar.)



ioanell said:


> I thought that this might be somewhat misleading for others


I agree and I understand your correction. (The reason for this translation of mine was the fact that I translated to Greek, not from Greek. Which means that the only Greek translation of "go for a walk" which came to my mind was "παρπατώ".)


----------



## Perseas

διαφορετικός said:


> In the example "σου δίνω τα κλειδιά", "σου" looks like "a person who receives benefit". But it is more "directly" connected to the verb, so it is called an "object", do you agree?


The object and the gentive referring to a person have a different function.
The object belongs to the core of the sentence, it's part of the predicate. For example: _She *dances*. She _*reads a book*. Here the predicates are _dances_ (verb) and _reads a book_ (verb and object).
On the other hand, the genitive referring to a person (γενική προσωπική) indicates that this person is in some way closely involved in the action expressed by the verb. For example: "Να *μου* φιλήσεις τα παιδιά". The verb "φιλώ" exerts its action on "τα παιδιά" which is the object, not on "μου", which denotes that I am only somehow involved in the verb's action.



διαφορετικός said:


> This leads me to the question: _Why_ do we distinguish "direct" from "indirect" objects at all? (I cannot answer this question even for the German language or grammar.)


I think German uses the terms "Akkusativobjekt", "Dativobjekt", "Genitivobjekt" , which makes things more clear.



ioanell said:


> Thank you, Perseas. It is really quite strange that Babiniotis in his Dictionary (at least in two different editions I own) characterizes αρέσω as an intransitive verb, which means is has no object whatsoever, and in his Grammar as a transitive one, which of course has an object.
> Unfortunately, the photo showing the relevant entry of the dictionary can't be uploaded due to its large size, as the system says.


Yes, I looked it up in the dictionary. You're right, ioanell.


----------



## ianis

Isn't "to please" the English equivalent of αρέσω? Don't people say things like "it pleases me?" Or "I'm pleased with/by something..."


----------



## ioanell

Hi, 


διαφορετικός said:


> This leads me to the question: _Why_ do we distinguish "direct" from "indirect" objects at all? (I cannot answer this question even for the German language or grammar.)



διαφορετικέ, I don’t know if this question of yours in #43, which is a matter of syntactical analysis, cancels and takes back your view expressed in #20 and #27 above, ie. “…_the English word does not have this meaning. An "intransitive verb" does not have a direct object, but it can have indirect objects. (In German, "intransitives Verb" means the same as the English term._)”. If this view is still in force, I ‘m afraid there will be a disagreement over it and I will need some further explanations along with examples, anyway a fruitful discussion in the end.


----------



## Perseas

ianis said:


> Isn't "to please" the English equivalent of αρέσω? Don't people say things like "it pleases me?" Or "I'm pleased with/by something..."


I think "I like something" is more common, but "it pleases me" has similar structure with "αυτό μου αρέσει". Native speakers of English can answer better, anyway.


----------



## διαφορετικός

ioanell said:


> there will be a disagreement over it


Maybe it is only a misunderstanding or lack of understanding ...


ioanell said:


> Direct objects in genitive are few in comparison with those in accusative, nevertheless they exist.
> 
> The object of the (monotransitive) verb is in the accusative.
> The object of the (monotransitive) verb is in the genitive or it can alternatively be a prepositional phrase.


I think this means that direct objects in Greek can be in the accusative, in the genitive or in a prepositional phrase. Consequently I cannot deduce the form of the object from the fact that it is a direct object.

In contrast, in English and in German, as far as I know, the direct (and the indirect) object (in German rather "Akkusativobjekt" and "Dativobjekt") always has a known form (e.g. the direct object in English is never introduced with a preposition). But your above description seems to say that this is not true in Greek. This leads to the following questions:

Is there a ("simple") definition (that I might not know) of "direct object" and "indirect object"?
What is the purpose of talking about the type (direct / indirect) of an object, if it does not determine its form (in the Greek language)?
I hope you can see what is my problem here.

PS:


ioanell said:


> I don’t know if this question of yours in #43, which is a matter of syntactical analysis, cancels and takes back your view expressed in #20 and #27 above


These messages of mine are contradictory, I agree: I asked _why_ we distinguish "direct" from "indirect" objects, although I had done so myself. Well, in German we can probably do without these terms and just use the terms "accusative object" and "dative object". In English however, it seems to make more sense, since there are no such cases (accusative, dative). In Greek: I am not sure.


----------



## ianis

Perseas said:


> I think "I like something" is more common, but "it pleases me" has similar structure with "αυτό μου αρέσει". Native speakers of English can answer better, anyway.


Thanks.
I was thinking that maybe what causes strangeness is in one case (like) being the action of liking and in the other (please/αρέσω) the action of making oneself liked. But the second being rendered to English as the first which indeed results in an inversion of roles in terms of who is performing the action.

In Portuguese there is also an equivalent probably originated from Greek which is agradar. But we put the me after the word, Brazilians, if they use the word, are likely to put the me before just like in greek.



BTW just one basic question. I heard that in some parts of Greece με and σε replaced μου/σου are με αρέσει/ σε αρέσει used in those parts?


----------



## Perseas

ianis said:


> I was thinking that maybe what causes strangeness is in one case (like) being the action of liking and in the other (please/αρέσω) the action of making oneself liked. But the second being rendered to English as the first which indeed results in an inversion of roles in terms of who is performing the action.


I understand what you say. Maybe, "it pleases me" is better rendered "με ευχαριστεί".



ianis said:


> BTW just one basic question. I heard that in some parts of Greece με and σε replaced μου/σου are με αρέσει/ σε αρέσει used in those parts?


Yes, in Thessaloniki, for example.
"με αρέσει" - Αναζήτηση Google


----------



## ianis

Perseas said:


> I understand what you say. Maybe, "it pleases me" is better rendered "με ευχαριστεί".
> 
> 
> Yes, in Thessaloniki, for example.
> "με αρέσει" - Αναζήτηση Google



Thank you. About the first, to start with I wasn't sure if it has exactly the same meaning as αρέσω, on the other hand I think I have heard the expression "she pleases me" and thought it translates as αυτή μου αρέσει.


----------



## bearded

Please let's go back for one moment to the issue of moods and tenses.


Tr05 said:


> "Θα μου άρεσε να ταξιδε*ύ*ω στο Μεξικό"


If I said ''on that day I didn't like travelling'' (just past and on one occasion, not conditional) would  _να ταξιδέψω_ (aorist subjunctive) be correct? Or would also present subjunctive be acceptable?
Afti tin imera dhe mou arese na taxidhepso/taxidhevo.
Thank you.


----------



## Tr05

bearded said:


> If I said ''on that day I didn't like travelling'' (just past and on one occasion, not conditional) would _να ταξιδέψω_ (aorist subjunctive) be correct? Or would also present subjunctive be acceptable?
> Afti tin imera dhe mou arese na taxidhepso/taxidhevo



(It would sound better if you used "εκείνη" instead of "αυτή", because you're talking about *that* day)

I think it would be better if you said:

_"Εκείνη την ημέρα δε μου άρεσε που (/το ότι) ταξίδευα/ταξίδεψα"_,

depending on the sense of duration you wish to convey or not, as per my previous message.

_"Που/Ότι"_ is your go-to (I don't like generalizations, but I do believe it's safe enough, in this case) when you're referring to something that has taken place already ("The fact that I had to travel on that day, yeah, I didn't like it").

And that's actually the missing word in _"το ότι"_ [_=το γεγονός (=fact) ότι]_.


----------



## Tr05

Tr05 said:


> "Εκείνη την ημέρα δε μου άρεσε που (/το ότι) ταξίδευα/ταξίδεψα"



Please note that the choice of verbs is between the imperfect and perfect past tense, which I didn't mention in the message above.


----------



## Perseas

bearded said:


> If I said ''on that day I didn't like travelling'' (just past and on one occasion, not conditional) would  _να ταξιδέψω_ (aorist subjunctive) be correct?


It doesn't sound natural, as explained.
But using other verbs, "να ταξιδέψω" sounds natural, e.g. Εκείνη τη μέρα (δεν) ήθελα/έπρεπε να ταξιδέψω.


----------



## ioanell

διαφορετικός said:


> I think this means that direct objects in Greek can be in the accusative, in the genitive or in a prepositional phrase.



That's right.



διαφορετικός said:


> Is there a ("simple") definition (that I might not know) of "direct object" and "indirect object"?
> What is the purpose of talking about the type (direct / indirect) of an object, if it does not determine its form (in the Greek language)?
> διαφορετικέ, I don’t know what exactly you mean by “simple”, but here is the definition as given (with slightly differentiated wording) by some of the most accredited dictionaries. I ‘m afraid I couldn’t make it any simpler.
> 
> In ditransitive verbs, direct is the object (person, animal, thing) which directly receives (or is affected in a way by) the action of the verb and is an indispensable complement of the verb’s meaning, e.g. Του έδωσα *ένα βιβλίο*, *ένα βιβλίο* is the direct object. You can’t simply say Του έδωσα. If you do so, your sentence will be incomplete and you will be immediately asked *Τι;* (=What [του έδωσες]).
> 
> In monotransitive verbs, where you have just one object, there is no need to call it direct and, whenever this happens, it is just an unnecessary pleonasm. E.g. Ο ήλιος θερμαίνει *τη γη*. Here the object is in the accusative (In English and in German the structure is quite the same: The sun warms *the earth */ Die Sonne wärmt* die Erde*). I guess you agree.
> 
> With some other monotransitive verbs (few as we have already said) the object is either in the genitive, e.g. Ο Γιώργος μοιάζει *του πατέρα* του, or in a prepositional (preposition+noun/pronoun) phrase, e.g. Ο Γιώργος μοιάζει *στον *[<*σ*’ τον<*σε* τον] *πατέρα* του, Ο Δημήτρης μοιάζει *με τον* *αδερφό* του.
> 
> In ditransitive verbs, indirect object is an additional noun or pronoun in the genitive case or, alternatively, in a preposition+accusative combination, which, as a rule, indicates the person or thing that receives what is being given or done*: *the person or thing that the action of a verb is performed for or directed to, e.g. *Του* έδωσα ένα βιβλίο, *Του* is the indirect object or in Έδωσα *του Γιώργου* ένα βιβλίο, *του Γιώργου* is the indirect object. If you just say έδωσα ένα βιβλίο, your sentence will be partially incomplete and you will be asked *Σε ποιον;* (=to whom [έδωσες ένα βιβλίο]). So, the indirect object completes the meaning of the verb and the direct object (as a secondary object). (_The difference in English is the case of the indirect object [objective or accusative *him* instead of genitive _*του*_] and its place: I gave *him *a book). Given this, I see that the structure in German is very close, when you say “Ich gab *ihm *ein Buch”; the difference here is that the indirect object is in dative, which we don’t have in MG, and that it isn’t called an “indirect object”, but simply “Dativobjekt”, isn’t it. (Note that the German structure here is absolutely the same as the Ancient Greek one_). Alternatively, you can say Έδωσα ένα βιβλίο *σ’ αυτόν* / *στον* *Γιώργο*. This is a structure you use when you especially want to stress for whom the action was intended.
> 
> In ditransitive verbs with double accusative, the accusative denoting a person is the direct object, whereas the accusative denoting a “thing” is the indirect one. (for further explanation on this, you can see #7 of the “Σε ρωτάω κάτι» vs “Σου ρωτάω κάτι” thread).
> 
> Finally, the only case of having an object with an intransitive verb (exactly the same happens in English) is with the *εσωτερικό *ή* σύστοιχο* *αντικείμενο* (cognate object in English), i.e. when the object is etymologically or semantically related to the verb, e.g. τα νιάτα *ζουν* τη *ζωή* τους (the young ones live their lives), Η Μαρία *χόρεψε* έναν ζωηρό *χορό *(Maria danced a cheerful dance).


----------



## διαφορετικός

Many thanks for your explanations, ioanell.

The following is my attempt to present some of the information received till now in a form which represents my understanding. If you discover any mistakes or errors, please tell me so.

Definitions:
Verbs which do not require an object are called "intransitive". (But some of them _can_ have a "cognate object", e.g. "ζω τη ζωή".)
Verbs which require an object (maybe more than one) are called "transitive".
Verbs which require only one object are called "monotransitive" and their object is a "direct object".
Verbs which require two objects are called "ditransitive" and their objects are a "direct object" and an "indirect object".

The *differential definition of the direct and the indirect object* (possible only for ditransitive verbs) depends on the meaning of the verb. In general the direct object receives the verb's action, whereas the indirect object receives what is being given or done. With "verbs with double accusative" (e.g. "σε ρωτάω κάτι"), the direct object is a person, and the indirect object is not a person.

Syntax:
The direct object is expressed as accusative, except if the verb is one of the few particular monotransitive verbs (e.g. μοιάζω) where it is expressed as "genitive or preposition+accusative".
The indirect object is expressed as "genitive or preposition+accusative", except if the verb is "ditransitive with double accusative".


----------



## ioanell

διαφορετικός said:


> The following is my attempt to present some of the information received till now in a form which represents my understanding. If you discover any mistakes or errors, please tell me so.
> 
> Definitions:
> Verbs which do not require an object are called "intransitive". (But some of them _can_ have a "cognate object", e.g. "ζω τη ζωή".)
> Verbs which require an object (maybe more than one) are called "transitive".
> Verbs which require only one object are called "monotransitive" and their object is a "direct object".
> Verbs which require two objects are called "ditransitive" and their objects are a "direct object" and an "indirect object".


 


διαφορετικός said:


> The *differential definition of the direct and the indirect object* (possible only for ditransitive verbs) depends on the meaning of the verb. In general the direct object receives the verb's action, whereas the indirect object receives what is being given or done. With "verbs with double accusative" (e.g. "σε ρωτάω κάτι"), the direct object is a person, and the indirect object is not a person.  _To be taken into account the note made in #7 of the “Σε ρωτάω κάτι», when not so often the direct object (person) takes a preposition in front of it and converts into an indirect one giving priority to the other object (thing), which then becomes direct._





διαφορετικός said:


> Syntax:
> The direct object is expressed as accusative, except if the verb is one of the few particular monotransitive verbs (e.g. μοιάζω) where it is expressed as "genitive or preposition+accusative".
> The indirect object is expressed as "genitive or preposition+accusative", except if the verb is "ditransitive with double accusative".



Your codification is excellent and your knowledge in Greek language matters impressive!


----------



## διαφορετικός

The main news for me was the fact that the designation of an object as "direct" or "indirect" is not directly connected with syntax, but directly with the number of required objects of the verb and with a kind of semantic ordering of the objects.
So if one wants to discuss syntax, it might be better not to use the terms "direct object" and "indirect object", but describe the syntactical appearance of the object. On the other hand, I don't know a technical term for "genitive or preposition+accusative" object, for example - hence my tendency to call it "indirect object", which is wrong with some verbs.


----------



## bearded

διαφορετικός said:


> I don't know a technical term for "genitive or preposition+accusative" object,


Perhaps ''oblique object/complement''.
Cf. #4  indirect object/oblique object.


----------

