Does a transitive verb always require a direct object?

If a verb is only listed in the dictionary as a transitive verb, can it be correctly used without a direct object, i.e. as an intransitive verb? We can use the verb “force” as an example, which is only listed as a transitive verb.

He always forces.

Can it be correct? Although the meaning is not clear from the example alone, but in context, the meaning could be understood regarding what he forces. Thank you for your help.

Answer

Yes, a transitive verb always requires a direct object. Maybe the direct object is implied and merely known via context, but a direct object that’s implied is nonetheless a direct object. Maybe you’re coining a use that doesn’t require a direct object, but that introduces a new definition that is intransitive.

Brass tacks: The very definition of “transitive” is that it requires a direct object. If it requires no direct object, neither expressed nor implied, then by definition, it becomes intransitive.

Attribution
Source : Link , Question Author : thinkpad22 , Answer Author : Benjamin Harman

Leave a Comment