double accusatives

[Jacob Baltuch]

Sandra van der Geer wrote:

[analysis 1]
>The original situation of `rAma.m pustaka.m darzayati' then is like
>`(he) makes rama - see the book. In other words, rama as the higher
>object, and the book as the lower object.

or

[analysis 2]
>The original situation of `rAma.m pustaka.m darzayati' then is more like
>`(he) makes the book - (so that) rAma sees (it). Much more difficult to
>analyse in terms of (apologize) generative grammar, but more satisfactory
>also. The analysis with rAma as the higher object goes wrong, as then
>`see the book' as a whole also functions as a direct object. Two direct
>obects are difficult.

Sorry if this is obvious but I don't understand this. Why two direct objects?

If you took as the basic analysis 'he makes/causes [Rama to see the book]'
where the whole clause 'Rama sees the book' would be the direct object and Rama
the subject of that clause, where would there be two direct objects?

(Or, to stay closer to the Sanskrit, something like 'he CAUSATIVE [Rama
sees the book]'
becoming 'he makes-see [Rama -- the book]')