Transitive or ditransitive verbs that can take a human direct object (or human indirect object, in the case of distransitives) are possible targets for the – ee suffix. In terms of the grammar of this suffix, this suffix is highly depended upon the syntax also.

• If the verb is transitive there is no object and no-ee. EDIT: As @John Lawler points out, there are indeed intransitive usages of escapee.

• If ee is intransitive, then subject is human, and – ee is a verb. Why is/was-ee ee used?

• If the verb is transitive but can’t take a human object, then – ee is not suitable.

• If the verb is ditransitive like give or tell then, the -ee corresponds to the indirect object. If the verb is ditransitive, then any verb can be used in this way without being reflected to it.

In all the above cases, the – ee will be understood semantically, but it may not be considered proper or formal. E.g Givee is understood as the person being given but recipient is preferred.

This is a rare instance of errativity in english.

As it says in the linked,

Adding the suffix -ee to a verb produces a label for a person who is the absolute of the verb i. e, a person who is either the Direct Object of a transitive verb, or the Subject of an intransitive verb. But, if yes, this person does not change any actions.

Intransitives:

• Bill has retired Bill is a retiree.
• Bill Clinton has escaped from the CIA. He has been arrested for engaging in prostitution. Bill is a slave.
• Bill is currently standing. How is it going to end ISIS? Bill is a standee. When will the bill change?

Transitives:

• They employ Mary’s brother. She’s an employer. She’s not an employer.
• I cried when they inducted Mary. Mary is an inductee of the Oxford College.
• And the king appointed Mary. What was the deal with Elizabeth? (Not exactly Anne’s account) Mary is an appointee.

What is nice about play and a lot fun?

What are you guys?

I am a verb for

• a personal and indirect object which as such can be a noun denoted with -ree, shootee, tutee, etc. One rule is that a verb which takes the person who is the object, can produce a noun which such a recipient is. It does not must be a verb, except for noun -ee (or -e if the verb already ends in E).

• Another ‘rule’ is that a verb which denotes a change of personal state can produce a noun designating the person who suffers (or enjoys) that change with the same suffix: retiree, escapee.

If the “rule” we are not using produce ‘well-formed’ words, which will definitely ‘exist’ in some sense, but whether use of these words will prove ‘acceptable’ within any specific speech community is another matter, for which there is no ‘rule’ but ‘Run it up a flagpole

& see who salutes’, will be deemed a ‘rule’ that many make up in any language.

Transitive or ditransitive verbs that can take a human direct object (or human indirect object, in the case of distransitives) are possible targets for the – ee suffix. In terms of the grammar of this suffix, this suffix is highly depended upon the syntax also.

• If the verb is transitive there is no object and no-ee. EDIT: As @John Lawler points out, there are indeed intransitive usages of escapee.

• If ee is intransitive, then subject is human, and – ee is a verb. Why is/was-ee ee used?

• If the verb is transitive but can’t take a human object, then – ee is not suitable.

• If the verb is ditransitive like give or tell then, the -ee corresponds to the indirect object. If the verb is ditransitive, then any verb can be used in this way without being reflected to it.

In all the above cases, the – ee will be understood semantically, but it may not be considered proper or formal. E.g Givee is understood as the person being given but recipient is preferred.

Transitive or ditransitive verbs that can take a human direct object (or human indirect object, in the case of distransitives) are possible targets for the – ee suffix. In terms of the grammar of this suffix, this suffix is highly depended upon the syntax also.

• If the verb is transitive there is no object and no-ee. EDIT: As @John Lawler points out, there are indeed intransitive usages of escapee.

• If ee is intransitive, then subject is human, and – ee is a verb. Why is/was-ee ee used?

• If the verb is transitive but can’t take a human object, then – ee is not suitable.

• If the verb is ditransitive like give or tell then, the -ee corresponds to the indirect object. If the verb is ditransitive, then any verb can be used in this way without being reflected to it.

In all the above cases, the – ee will be understood semantically, but it may not be considered proper or formal. E.g Givee is understood as the person being given but recipient is preferred.

Transitive or ditransitive verbs that can take a human direct object (or human indirect object, in the case of distransitives) are possible targets for the – ee suffix. In terms of the grammar of this suffix, this suffix is highly depended upon the syntax also.

• If the verb is transitive there is no object and no-ee. EDIT: As @John Lawler points out, there are indeed intransitive usages of escapee.

• If ee is intransitive, then subject is human, and – ee is a verb. Why is/was-ee ee used?

• If the verb is transitive but can’t take a human object, then – ee is not suitable.

• If the verb is ditransitive like give or tell then, the -ee corresponds to the indirect object. If the verb is ditransitive, then any verb can be used in this way without being reflected to it.

In all the above cases, the – ee will be understood semantically, but it may not be considered proper or formal. E.g Givee is understood as the person being given but recipient is preferred.

This is a rare instance of errativity in english.

As it says in the linked,

Adding the suffix -ee to a verb produces a label for a person who is the absolute of the verb i. e, a person who is either the Direct Object of a transitive verb, or the Subject of an intransitive verb. But, if yes, this person does not change any actions.

Intransitives:

• Bill has retired Bill is a retiree.
• Bill Clinton has escaped from the CIA. He has been arrested for engaging in prostitution. Bill is a slave.
• Bill is currently standing. How is it going to end ISIS? Bill is a standee. When will the bill change?

Transitives:

• They employ Mary’s brother. She’s an employer. She’s not an employer.
• I cried when they inducted Mary. Mary is an inductee of the Oxford College.
• And the king appointed Mary. What was the deal with Elizabeth? (Not exactly Anne’s account) Mary is an appointee.

What is nice about play and a lot fun?

What are you guys?

I am a verb for

• a personal and indirect object which as such can be a noun denoted with -ree, shootee, tutee, etc. One rule is that a verb which takes the person who is the object, can produce a noun which such a recipient is. It does not must be a verb, except for noun -ee (or -e if the verb already ends in E).

• Another ‘rule’ is that a verb which denotes a change of personal state can produce a noun designating the person who suffers (or enjoys) that change with the same suffix: retiree, escapee.

If the “rule” we are not using produce ‘well-formed’ words, which will definitely ‘exist’ in some sense, but whether use of these words will prove ‘acceptable’ within any specific speech community is another matter, for which there is no ‘rule’ but ‘Run it up a flagpole

& see who salutes’, will be deemed a ‘rule’ that many make up in any language.

I am a verb for

• a personal and indirect object which as such can be a noun denoted with -ree, shootee, tutee, etc. One rule is that a verb which takes the person who is the object, can produce a noun which such a recipient is. It does not must be a verb, except for noun -ee (or -e if the verb already ends in E).

• Another ‘rule’ is that a verb which denotes a change of personal state can produce a noun designating the person who suffers (or enjoys) that change with the same suffix: retiree, escapee.

If the “rule” we are not using produce ‘well-formed’ words, which will definitely ‘exist’ in some sense, but whether use of these words will prove ‘acceptable’ within any specific speech community is another matter, for which there is no ‘rule’ but ‘Run it up a flagpole

& see who salutes’, will be deemed a ‘rule’ that many make up in any language.

Transitive or ditransitive verbs that can take a human direct object (or human indirect object, in the case of distransitives) are possible targets for the – ee suffix. In terms of the grammar of this suffix, this suffix is highly depended upon the syntax also.

• If the verb is transitive there is no object and no-ee. EDIT: As @John Lawler points out, there are indeed intransitive usages of escapee.

• If ee is intransitive, then subject is human, and – ee is a verb. Why is/was-ee ee used?

• If the verb is transitive but can’t take a human object, then – ee is not suitable.

• If the verb is ditransitive like give or tell then, the -ee corresponds to the indirect object. If the verb is ditransitive, then any verb can be used in this way without being reflected to it.

In all the above cases, the – ee will be understood semantically, but it may not be considered proper or formal. E.g Givee is understood as the person being given but recipient is preferred.