Dear Ven. Pandita, Nina and friends,

thank you very much. I am really a beginner in Pali. In Warder's, it is
said:

[p.18] Verbs which are transitive in one language are not necessarily
translated by verbs which are transitive in another, hence these
properties [as whether the verbs can take a subject] must be noticed as
they occur in Pali verbs. Transitivity is of course a property of verbs,
not of their roots, thus the verbs bhuu and huu are intransitive but the
verbs pari-bhuu and anu-bhuu are transitive, whilst paatu(r)-bhuu and (p)
pa-huu are intransitive. The roots bhuu and huu are neither.

Then you suggested:
1. In English, transitive verbs require *explicit* objects, without
which they won't be complete.
2. On the other hand, in Pali, being a transitive verb means only that
it HAS an object, which may be *expressed or omitted and deducible
from the context*.
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Pali/message/6744

I think this is similar in English. Where an object is implied in the
context, it can be omitted from a sentence. We shall not pursue much
into English (as Nina suggested), unless it makes things clearer.

In your RG notes [item 8], and your recent posts, I see you qualify
gacchati as transitive. I shall take it as you, though in Warder's [p40],
he mentions "go" as intransitive, though he does not explicitly specifies
gacchati to be intransitive.

metta,
Yong Peng.