The accusative case ( abbreviated ) of a noun is the grammatical case used to mark the direct object of a transitive verb.

German uses the accusative to mark direct objects and objects of certain prepositions, or adverbs relating to time.

Here, the subject, Ich, is in the nominative case, the direct object, das Buch, is in the accusative case, and zum Verleger is in the dative case, since zu always requires the dative ( zum is a contraction of zu + dem ).

* ( accusative ) " man " a direct object ( e. g., toward the man, in the sense of argument directed personally ; I saw the man )

In addition to indicating direct objects, the accusative / allative case is used with nouns, adjectives and adverbs to show the destination of a motion, or to replace certain prepositions ; the nominative / oblique is used in all other situations.

* The accusative case indicates the direct object of a verb: The clerk remembered us.

* Accept a direct object ( in accusative in the positive form, and in genitive in the negative form ) OR

In languages which mark grammatical case, it is common to differentiate the objects of a ditransitive verb using, for example, the accusative case for the direct object, and the dative case for the indirect object ( but this morphological alignment is not unique ; see below ).

If the three arguments of a typical ditransitive verb are labeled D ( for Donor ; the subject of a verb like " to give " in English ), T ( for Theme ; normally the direct object of ditransitive verb in English ) and R ( for Recipient, normally the indirect object in English ), these can be aligned with the Agent and Patient of monotransitive verbs and the Subject of intransitive verbs in several ways, which are not predicted by whether the language is accusative, ergative, or active.

In Latin and many other languages, the direct object is marked by the accusative case, while the indirect object is typically marked by the dative case.

Modern English preserves a case distinction for pronouns, but it has conflated the accusative and dative into a single oblique case, the object pronouns him, her, me, etc., which may function either as direct or indirect objects.

* in an accusative role for a direct object:

Unlike nouns, adjectives and other pronouns, personal pronouns do not use the direct case, but preserve the distinction between the nominative and accusative instead.

# The use of a direct object in the genitive instead of the accusative in negation signifies that the noun is indefinite, compare: " Я не вижу книги " (" I don't see a book " or " I don't see any book ") and " Я не вижу книгу " (" I don't see the book ").

For either alignment two core cases are used ( unlike passive and antipassive voice, which have only one ), but the same morphology is used for the " nominative " of the agent-trigger alignment and the " absolutive " of the patient-trigger alignment, so there is a total of just three core cases: common S / A / O ( usually called nominative, or less ambiguously direct ), ergative A, and accusative O.

Nominative – accusative alignment uses the same coding system for subjects of transitive and intransitive verbs, and a different coding system for direct objects of transitive verbs.

Personal pronouns have distinct forms according to whether they stand for a subject ( nominative ), a direct object ( accusative ), an indirect object ( dative ), or a reflexive object.

There are three basic cases: direct ( or absolutive, often inaccurately labeled the nominative ), indirect ( which may function as an ergative, accusative, or genitive ), and oblique.

For example, in Latin, most transitive verbs require their direct object to appear in the accusative case, while the dative case is reserved for indirect objects.

# accusative ( used for the direct object of a verb ),

* In direct objects, the accusative suffix-n is replaced with the preposition je.

Rabbi Akiva reportedly is challenged to explain the two uses in of the word ‘ et ( this word marks the accusative state ( direct object ) and cannot be directly translated in English ).

Observe that for direct and indirect objects, when they are preceded by the preposition a the pronoun will be in the prepositional case instead of in the accusative or dative.

The accusative is the direct object case and it is marked with-v in the singular.

In morphosyntactic alignment terms, both perform the accusative function, but the accusative object is telic, while the partitive is not.

If this article / noun pair is used as the object of a verb, it ( usually ) changes to the accusative case, which entails an article shift in German – Ich sehe den Wagen.

Here, the object pronoun " me " has the same function as a dative pronoun in a language that distinguishes accusative and dative cases.

In this sentence, Freund would seem to be the indirect object, but, because it follows an ( direction ), the accusative is required, not the dative.

The aspect is indicated by the case of the object: accusative is telic and partitive is atelic.

In tripartite languages, both the agent and object of a transitive clause have case forms, ergative and accusative, whereas the agent of an intransitive clause is the unmarked citation form.

Typologically, it is a highly agglutinating language with subject – verb – object word order and nominative – accusative morphosyntactic alignment.

The accusative indicates telicity ; that is, the object has been finalized or the intended action is done.

This construction is similar to the passive voice, in that it decreases the verb's valency by one-the passive by deleting the subject ( and " promoting " the accusative object to a nominative subject ), the antipassive by deleting the object ( and " promoting " the ergative agent to an absolutive subject ).

The masculine forms for German articles, e. g., ' the ', ' a / an ', ' my ', etc., change in the accusative case: they always end in-en.

: Latin accusative singular form, e. g. " to the church ".

The process of case collapse was also already underway in Old English, e. g. in strong masculine nouns, where the nominative and accusative cases had become identical.

Example of the nominative – accusative pattern: i < sub > 3 </ sub >- du-un (< * i < sub > 3 </ sub >- du-en ) " I go ( away )"; e < sub > 2 </ sub > ib < sub > 2 </ sub >- du < sub > 3 </ sub >- un (< * ib < sub > 2 </ sub >- du < sub > 3 </ sub >- en ) " I build the house " ( the transitive subject is expressed in the same way as the intransitive subject, as both verbs takes the same 1st person singular suffix-en ).

Old Russian also had a third number, the dual, but except for its use in the nominative and accusative cases with the numbers two, three and four, e. g. ( два стула, " two chairs ", recategorized today as a genitive singular ), it has been lost.

In ergative – absolutive languages the syntactic pivot may be the argument marked with the absolutive case, but this is not always so, since ergative languages are often not " pure " and show a mixed behaviour ( e. g. ergative morphology and accusative syntax ).

* The HOL admits ( separation-style ) subtyping, e. g. NPacc, the type of accusative noun phrases, is a subtype of NP, and denotes a subset of the category denoted by NP.

In this context it is accusative and used substantively ( i. e., as a noun ) to mean " better things ", " always better ", " ever better ", or, more fully, " for the pursuit of the better ".

# preservation of ending-og ( a ) in genitive and accusative singular of masculine and neuter gender if pronominal-adjectival declension ( e. g. drugoga ), with exceptions on the area of Dubrovnik and Livno

Another Turkish feature is the morphological marking of definiteness in the accusative case, e. g. líkos " wolf ( nominative / unmarked indefinite accusative )" vs. líko " wolf ( marked definite accusative )".

The original Germanic contextual difference between the dative and accusative cases, standardized in e. g. modern German and Icelandic, has degenerated in spoken Danish and Swedish, a tendency which spread to Bokmål too.

While speakers of e. g. modern German or Icelandic have a natural sense for the difference between the dative and accusative cases, few people in Scandinavia really understand the contextual difference, even if they have studied e. g. German for several years.

# no merger of nominative and accusative singular of masculines regardless of animacy, i. e. N sg.

It generally is applied to linguistic indicators of the accusative case, such as the use of the prefix " et " in Hebrew, for nouns in the accusative, which are indicated by use of the definite article ( i. e. " the ").

( e. g. " Iuppiter ," " Iovis ," " Iovi ," " Iovem ," " Iove " Latin being the nominative, genitive, dative, accusative, and ablative forms of Jupiter ( mythology ) | Iuppiter, respectively ).

In announcing the name of the newly-elected pontiff, the new pontiff's birth first name is announced in Latin in the accusative case ( e. g., Angelum Iosephum, Ioannem Baptistam, Albinum, Carolum, Iosephum ), but the new pontiff's surname or family name is given in the undeclined form ( e. g., Roncalli, Montini, Luciani, Wojtyła, Ratzinger ).

The clitic pronouns, whether enclitic or proclitic, normally cluster in the same order: dative clitics precede accusative clitics, se is in the front always, then follow second persons, then first persons and third persons are always last ; furthermore, in a sequence of two third-pronominal object clitics, the dative one must always be se ( e. g. Juan se lo mandó " Juan sent it to him ").

* as in Low Saxon, no distinctive marking for dative case and accusative case, using one or the other German marker for both cases ; e. g.