[vcg3rd]

The problem isn't the Oxford comma. The problem is lazy--or possibly rapid, if one is generous--writing and editing (if any). If the use or absence of a comma causes ambiguity, it's probably best to rewrite the sentence.

I believe it was Orwell who wrote a friend: "I am sorry this letter is so long. I didn't have time to make it shorter."

[GrumpySloth]

Blaise Pascal, several centuries earlier.

[gerdesj]

Well, if we are going to be authoritative then we might like to ... well:

"I believe it was Orwell who wrote [to] a friend: "

... soz, you are probably left pondian and have a habit of writing your friends. I like to get all transitive and write to mine.

[thaumasiotes]

> you are probably left pondian and have a habit of writing your friends. I like to get all transitive and write to mine.

"Writing your friends" is transitive; "writing to them" is intransitive.

[wolverine876]

> "Writing your friends" is transitive; "writing to them" is intransitive.

Does the infinitive [edit: ^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H] made it intransitive? Also, 'writing' is a noun (a gerund), not a verb.

[thaumasiotes]

You packed a lot of confusion in there.

1. There is no infinitive in either phrase, though it is true that "writing" is a non-finite form. As you note, it is a gerund.

2. While you are correct to say that a gerund is a noun, you're wrong to say that it isn't a verb. You can clearly see that it retains the complements of the verb. A gerund is a verb cast into the syntactic form of a noun just as a participle is a verb cast into the syntactic form of an adjective.

3. A transitive verb is one that takes a direct object. An intransitive verb is any other verb.

4. "Them" is a direct object of "write" in "writing them", but an indirect object, marked by the preposition to, in "writing to them".

5. Just to be really clear, it is only possible to supply a direct object to the gerund "writing" because it is a verb that (in British usage) takes a direct object. There is no such concept as the object of a noun.

[wolverine876]

> 1. There is no infinitive in either phrase

you're right. how embarassing.

> 2. While you are correct to say that a gerund is a noun, you're wrong to say that it isn't a verb. You can clearly see that it retains the complements of the verb. A gerund is a verb cast into the syntactic form of a noun just as a participle is a verb cast into the syntactic form of an adjective.

Conceded also. This is going terribly. Have I been hustled? Are you a ringer?

> 3. A transitive verb is one that takes a direct object. An intransitive verb is any other verb.

> 4. "Them" is a direct object of "write" in "writing them", but an indirect object, marked by the preposition to, in "writing to them".

Sure, though I didn't say otherwise. I admit I wouldn't have said #3 part B so absolutely; I wonder if there are edge cases.

(Was the parent written by GPT?)

[thaumasiotes]

> I admit I wouldn't have said #3 part B so absolutely; I wonder if there are edge cases.

Sort of. There isn't a semantic difference between direct and indirect objects (there are some tendencies). Latin verbs with a prefix very commonly take indirect objects where you would expect a direct one. It's pretty normal (for us) to just think of that situation as the verb taking its object in a weird case; I have no idea how the Romans thought about it.†

As a matter of technical terminology, those are just the definitions of transitive and intransitive verbs. How you apply the concept of "direct object" may vary from language to language. In English a direct object is one that is an otherwise unmarked object of a verb (assuming we're happy with our ability to identify those) and an indirect object is one marked by a preposition. In Latin a direct object is one that appears in the accusative case, and an indirect object is one in the dative case. In Mandarin Chinese direct objects are unmarked and most typically appear after the verb, while indirect objects are marked with a preposition and appear before the verb... but if you want to rearrange the elements of a sentence, there is a preposition of this kind that serves no other purpose than to allow a direct object to be positioned before the verb.

† This is a hazier situation than occurs with deponent verbs, where the evidence is very strong that the verbs "really are" active in Latin despite requiring grammatically passive forms.

[wolverine876]

Too late to edit: The GPT comment was a joke; sorry that wasn't clear.

[bennettbackward]

"I believe it was Orwell who wrote a friend [a letter]:"

It's perfectly correct and common to say "wrote a friend".

[wolverine876]

> correct and common

Those are not the same, my common friend.

[Doxin]

In this case, however, it is both.