A sentence containing ditransitive verb can have two objects.
In the ditransitive verbs a subcategory, as it is described in some of the articles, usually called "Attributive ditransitive verbs" segregates these verbs in two. Attributive ditransitive verbs include name, call, consider among others. But in grammatical terms attributive ditransitive verbs are not ditransitive as they have only one object.
"They called me a liar" Here "a liar" is the object complement, not direct object.
In most of the articles I've read about object complements the sentences they have instantiated with are the ones including an attributive ditransitive verb.
The other type of sentence is Secondary predicate Construction. As described in wikipedia there are two types of secondary predicate construction
And they say it's mostly "Adjectival" in construction.
The cup arrived broken (Broken is the resultative secondary predicate)
They shot him Dead (Resultative secondary predicate over object)
I only eat carrots raw (Depictive secondary predicate over object)
Sam ate fish hot. (Depictive secondary predicate over object)
And reading this article amI've found an example where they used a "Noun phrase" as complement in the resultative secondary predicate construction. The sentence goes like this
- Sue finished the project a complete wreck. ( "a complete wreck" here used as the complement of object "Project")
In almost every article about object complements on internet, including the trustable wikipedia, they say that both "Noun phrases" and "Adjective phrases" are used as object complements. And at the same time they give "Attributive ditransitive construction" as examples of "noun" as object complement, whereas giving examples of "Resultative and Depictive construction" as examples of "adjective" as object complement.
Is it possible to have a "noun or noun phrase" as object/subject complement in "Depictive or Resultative" construction?
Winter froze the lake an ice block. ("An ice block" is complement of object "Lake")
I pounded the metal a rectangular sheet. ( "a rectangular sheet" is complement of object metal)
He drank the soup a dead man. ( "a dead man" is complement of the subject "he")
She pulled the luggage an elephant. ( "Elephant" is complement of object "luggage")
Are these constructions legit from linguistic perspective?
Also, in the constructions without object it is still possible to use resultative and Depictive constructions; can we still construct a sentence in the same vein?
- The lake froze an ice block. ("an ice block" is the complement of subject "the lake")
Please Refer to these articles
The construction with "adjective" immediately after object is grammatically correct even though to my eyes they sound a bit weird. It's justified by the construction called "Resultative" in most of the places and at some other places "depictive". Together they are called "Secondary predicate" as they are not part of the main predicate. It sparked a doubt in me when I read that article I have included in the question. If they consider "Attributive ditransitive" construction an example of object complement (The second "noun" in the construction is obviously COMPLEMENT) then why not this very example of noun being the complement not considered one? (Depictive and Resultative)
The only example I've seen of it is from the Berkeley article
Sue finished the project a complete wreck. ( Here "a complete wreck" is without a doubt a noun phrase and "Complement" to the subject or object)
If i write "Sue finished the project tired" or "Sue finished the project nearly incomplete", it is justified according to the above articles.
But what if i change these adjectives to nouns? (As it is written in the Berkeley article)
- Sue finished the project an insane woman.
- Sue finished the project a boring mess. (Remember to read these sentences from the Depictive/resultative POV, otherwise they may sound awkward.)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ditransitive_verb (Attributive ditransitive close to the end)