In my last blog post, I explained, what is a direct object. Now that you know, we can go to step 2: what is a transitive verb. Also here, I have a very, very simple explanation for you.
Can it undergo a transition?
The transition, many smart books are talking about, is happening when a verb changes from the active to the passive voice. There are verbs, that can (normally) not form the passive voice.
Examples:
to cry
to run
to die
etc.
Before we see, how we use that in Hebrew and how that will influence the use of the direct object marker "et", Let me go for a moment over these examples:
You can cry tears (or water, or blood), but the tears are not "being cried". There is no passive action going on. The tears are not receiving the action, they are part of the action. No object is available to receive the action.
When you run a marathon, there is no passive action going on. The marathon is not "receiving" the action. Here, we explain, what kind of running we are doing, Again, nobody or thing (= object) is receiving any action, no harm or good is done to anybody or thing (= object).
The direct object marker "et"
My last blog post was entirely about this little word, but I know that for many students, it is better to first explain, what is a direct object, and then come back to this little word "et". This is, what we do in this blog post.
He gives her the book -> " הוּא נוֹתֵן לָהּ אֶת הַסֵּפֶר "
Let's analyze together: Do we have a transitive verb? Yes; "to give" is a transitive verb (can form the passive voice). Do we also have an object which can receive the action? Yes; the book. You could also say: "The book is being given to her"; = use of the passive voice.
Summary: we identified all the necessary elements of a sentence with a direct object. So, there must be "et" before the direct object to mark it as such. When there is no direct object, there is not "et". When you start thinking about the sentence you want to say, and you notice that you are about to use a verb that cannot form the passive voice (= intransitive), then, in 99% of the cases, you can forget about the marker "et".
Let me give you 3 examples in English, to make it a bit clearer:
He gives her the book -> " הוּא נוֹתֵן לָהּ אֶת הַסֵּפֶר "
He cries tears -> " הוּא בּוֹכֶה דְּמָעוֹת " (no object, no "et")
I ran marathons for fun -> " רַצְתִּי מָרָתוֹן בִּשְׁבִיל הַכֵּיף " (no object, no "et")
As you can see, in cases 2, and 3 respectively, it is not only that we do not have a direct object, we are also not using a verb that can form the passive voice, so there is no possibility for a direct object to appear. Hence, no "et" is necessary.
You never need "et" when ...
... there is no direct article, meaning: you are not pointing out the object. For example, you just give somebody a book, and not THE BOOK:
He gives her a book -> " הוּא נוֹתֵן לָהּ סֵּפֶר "
There is no direct article "ha", we did not point out the object, so no "et" needed.
--- even if the verb actually is transitive
Yes, the verb "to give" is transitive, and according to the first explanation, that would qualify for the addition of "et". But additionally, we need to be specific about the object and we need to team up with the direct article.
I hope this last appendix was not too confusing. I already want to give thanks to Gina, who sent an email, pointing out the importance of the direct article for the decision of whether yes or no to put "et". So, I added this explanation after my assistant forwarded her email to me. I had not thought about it, which is why I love your input to learn about your point of view.