Most Latin clauses with a person and a thing use dative person plus accusative thing: fīliō librum dō, “I give my son a book.” A limited set of verbs instead licenses two accusatives. These fall into two fundamentally different patterns: “teach/ask/conceal” verbs can take an accusative person and accusative content, while “make/call/consider” verbs take an accusative object plus an accusative predicate that describes that object.
Review the ordinary dative-recipient pattern on Direct and Indirect Objects. The constructions below are lexically restricted departures from that baseline.
Do Not Treat Every Pair of Accusatives Alike
The visible endings are the same, but the constituent structures differ.
| Pattern | Structure | Example |
|---|---|---|
| person + content | verb + accusative person + accusative matter | discipulum grammaticam doceō |
| object + predicate | verb + accusative object + accusative description | Cicerōnem cōnsulem creant |
| ordinary transfer, not double accusative | verb + dative person + accusative thing | discipulō librum dō |
Magister discipulum grammaticam docet.
The teacher teaches the student grammar.
Cīvēs Lūcium cōnsulem creāvērunt.
The citizens elected Lucius consul.
In the first, discipulum and grammaticam name two participants: the learner and the subject matter. In the second, Lūcium and cōnsulem name one person under two roles. The citizens did not elect two objects; they caused Lucius to hold the predicate status “consul.”
Person and Content with Teaching Verbs
Doceō, docēre, docuī, doctum “teach” can take the learner and the subject matter as accusatives.
Līvia puerōs litterās Graecās docet.
Livia teaches the boys Greek literature.
Masculine plural puerōs identifies the learners; feminine plural litterās Graecās identifies the material. English “teaches the boys Greek literature” happens to resemble the Latin order, but Latin case—not position—licenses both roles.
The content need not be a school subject narrowly defined.
Centuriō tīrōnēs ōrdinem pugnae docuit.
The centurion taught the recruits the battle formation.
Latin also permits alternative constructions. The subject matter can be introduced with dē + ablative, especially when the meaning is “instruct about,” and the learner can sometimes be expressed in a different verbal paraphrase. These alternatives are not admissions that the double accusative is wrong; they offer ways to manage emphasis and complexity.
Ēdoceō “teach thoroughly, inform fully” is especially comfortable with a person plus content in (formal) prose. The lexical choice suggests complete instruction or full information; it is not merely a more impressive spelling of everyday doceō.
Person and Content with Asking and Demanding
Rogō can take the person questioned and the thing asked as accusatives. The content is often a neuter pronoun such as hoc, illud, quid, or multa.
Tē hoc unum rogō: cūr tam subitō discēdis?
I ask you just this one thing: why are you leaving so suddenly?
Iūdicēs testem multa rogāvērunt.
The judges asked the witness many questions.
Accusative tē or testem is the person addressed; hoc unum or multa is the content. Latin can alternatively say hoc ā tē rogō, literally “I ask this from you.” The prepositional person is often clearer when the content is long or when source rather than addressee is prominent.
Related verbs such as poscō “demand,” reposcō “demand back,” and flāgitō “pressingly demand” can likewise take a person and thing in the accusative, though their tones differ. Flāgitō is forceful and often (formal/literary); it should not be substituted for a polite request.
Lēgātī rēgem pācem poposcērunt.
The envoys demanded peace from the king.
This construction is lexical. Ordinary transfer verbs do not acquire two accusatives merely because English places person and thing side by side. Dō still requires dative recipient plus accusative theme.
Person and Matter with Cēlō
Cēlō, cēlāre, cēlāvī, cēlātum means “hide from, keep unaware.” It can take the person kept ignorant and the concealed matter as accusatives.
Mē cōnsilium cēlāvistī.
You kept the plan from me.
Dux mīlitēs perīculum nōn cēlāvit.
The commander did not conceal the danger from the soldiers.
English reverses the apparent direction with “hide the plan from me,” which tempts learners to write ā mē. Classical Latin's double accusative instead profiles mē as the person affected by being kept ignorant. A construction with dē + ablative of the matter is also possible: mē dē cōnsiliō cēlāvistī. There is no conceptual shortcut that chooses between every variant; usage and intended emphasis matter.
Object and Predicate with Making, Naming, and Choosing
The second major type contains one object and a secondary predicate. The predicate accusative tells what the object becomes, is called, is considered, or is kept as.
Senātus Mārcum prōvinciae praefectum fēcit.
The senate made Marcus governor of the province.
Accusative praefectum agrees with Mārcum and states the resulting role. Genitive prōvinciae depends on praefectum: Marcus is made governor “of the province.” This illustrates an important discipline: establish dependencies before copying English constituent order.
Rōmānī eum rēgem appellāvērunt.
The Romans called him king.
Tē amīcum putō.
I consider you a friend.
Cīvēs Mārcum praetōrem creāvērunt.
The citizens elected Marcus praetor.
In each sentence, object and predicate share accusative case because the secondary predicate is oriented to the object. It also agrees in gender and number when its form permits: eās fīliās meās putō, “I consider them my daughters,” has feminine plural fīliās meās agreeing with feminine plural eās.
Adjectives occur in the same pattern.
Hanc viam tūtam iūdicāmus.
We judge this route safe.
Accusative feminine singular tūtam describes hanc viam. It is not a second affected entity. Compare hanc viam tūtam faciēmus, “we will make this route safe,” where the predicate describes a resulting state.
The class includes faciō “make,” creō “elect,” appellō/vocō “call,” putō “consider,” iūdicō “judge,” and certain uses of habeō “regard/hold as.” Their exact meanings and register differ: creō is characteristic of election to office (formal/political), whereas vocō can simply supply a name.
The Passive Reveals the Difference
In the object-plus-predicate pattern, passive promotion makes the former object nominative, and its predicate becomes nominative too.
Lūcius cōnsul creātus est.
Lucius was elected consul.
Active accusatives Lūcium cōnsulem correspond to passive nominatives Lūcius cōnsul. This is a predicate nominative under the passive verb, not a retained accusative.
In the person-plus-content pattern, the accusative person can become the passive subject while the content accusative is retained.
Discipulī grammaticam docentur.
The students are taught grammar.
Nominative discipulī controls docentur; accusative grammaticam remains as the subject matter. This retained accusative is a restricted consequence of the active double-object frame. It is not a general license to attach an accusative to any passive verb.
Haec omnia rogātus sum.
I was asked all these things.
The understood active object “me” has become first-person subject in rogātus sum; neuter plural haec omnia remains accusative content. The participle rogātus marks a male speaker; a female speaker says rogāta sum.
Cicero supplies an authentic (formal) example of the same passive pattern, reproduced without editorial macrons:
scito primum me non esse rogatum sententiam
Know first that I was not asked my opinion. — Cicero, Letters to Friends 4.4.4
Accusative mē is the subject of the infinitive esse rogātum in indirect statement; sententiam is the retained content accusative. The two accusatives therefore have different immediate dependencies even though they stand in one embedded clause.
Route Accusatives with Verbs of Leading and Crossing
Certain prefixed motion verbs can combine an accusative person or object moved with another accusative expressing the route crossed. This is less productive and more lexical than the two central patterns.
Caesar exercitum flūmen trānsdūxit.
Caesar led the army across the river.
Exercitum is the moved object; flūmen expresses the space crossed. Neutral prose can clarify the route with trāns flūmen or another prepositional phrase, depending on the verb and emphasis. Recognize the bare route accusative in historical (formal/literary) prose, but do not generalize it to every motion verb.
A Parsing Procedure
- Confirm that neither accusative is governed by a preposition or merely measures time, distance, or extent.
- Identify the verb and verify that its lexical frame licenses two accusatives.
- Test coreference: if the second accusative describes the first, analyze object + predicate.
- If they are distinct participants, test the limited person + content class: teaching, asking, demanding, or concealing.
- Use passive behavior as confirmation: predicate accusative becomes nominative; content accusative may remain after promotion of the person.
- Recast with dē, ab, or a clearer verb when the Classical alternative better expresses the intended relation.
Common Mistakes
Making an ordinary recipient accusative
❌ Pater fīliam pecūniam dat.
Incorrect — dō takes dative recipient plus accusative thing.
✅ Pater fīliae pecūniam dat.
The father gives his daughter money.
Giving doceō a dative learner by analogy with dō
❌ Grammaticus puellae litterās docet.
Incorrect in the standard double-accusative frame — the learner is accusative.
✅ Grammaticus puellam litterās docet.
The teacher teaches the girl literature.
Treating a predicate accusative as a second person
❌ Populus Mārcum et praetōrem creāvit.
Wrong for the intended one-person reading — et would make Marcus and a praetor two objects.
✅ Populus Mārcum praetōrem creāvit.
The people elected Marcus praetor.
Leaving the predicate accusative after passive promotion
❌ Mārcus praetōrem creātus est.
Incorrect — when Mārcus becomes nominative, its predicate must become nominative too.
✅ Mārcus praetor creātus est.
Marcus was elected praetor.
Generalizing the retained accusative
❌ Liber epistulam legitur.
Incorrect — ordinary legō does not license a second content accusative in the passive.
✅ Epistula legitur.
The letter is being read.
Key Takeaways
- Latin has two central double-accusative structures: person + content and object + secondary predicate.
- Teaching, asking, demanding, and concealing verbs license the first pattern lexically.
- Making, naming, electing, and considering verbs license an accusative predicate agreeing with their object.
- In the passive, an object predicate becomes nominative; a content accusative can remain after the person is promoted.
- Ordinary recipients still take the dative, and double accusatives cannot be created by copying English word order.
Now practice Latin
Reading grammar gets you part of the way. The exercises are where it sticks — free, no signup needed.
Start learning Latin →Related Topics
- Direct and Indirect ObjectsA2 — How accusative and dative marking distinguish the affected thing from the recipient, beneficiary, or addressee.
- Transitive and Intransitive VerbsA2 — How a Latin verb's lexical argument pattern determines whether it can govern a direct accusative object.
- Verbs Governing the DativeB1 — How Latin verbs select dative complements for people affected, trusted, obeyed, helped, opposed, or otherwise related to an action.
- Two Accusatives with Teaching and AskingA1 — Use and distinguish the person-accusative and thing-accusative licensed by a limited set of Latin verbs.
- Active and Passive VoiceA1 — Understand how Latin changes verb endings and clause structure to present a participant as actor or receiver of an action.