Hi Gunnar,

>
>
>That depends on the language used, and perhaps on the
>interpretation. Modern English actually doesn't have
>any other grammatical cases than genitive (for nouns),
>and it is debatable whether "John" is direct or
>indirect object;

In Sanskrit at least, the double accusative can be used with verbs
meaning speaking, asking, teaching, begging, and some specific other
verbs (including 'to milk'!). This is specified in the commentaries
to a sutra in Panini (1,4,51). However according to Speijer's
_Sanskrit Syntax_ (section 47), it's common, for example, to use
ablative or genitive of the person adressed in verbs of asking, and
in verbs of teaching it's also possible to use locative of the thing
taught. So the ablative in the original example was probably okay
(assuming Pali follows Sanskrit usage there).

I don't know for sure about Latin, but according to 'the net' there's
a robust term out there called: Accusativus duplex . Ancient Greek
has something similar, see:

http://people.uleth.ca/~robinson/GIG/accusative.html

The examples from English are only ways to explain the concept, not
attempts to formally describe the structure of English. The important
point is that Pali does allow double accusatives with certain verbs,
and 'pucchati' is one of them. (again, assuming Pali follows the
Sanskrit usage).

best regards,

/Rett