Furthermore, to write "I asked of him a question . . . " still has the object following the verb.
What Robert probably was getting at was that the object 'him' should be after the verb, which was something you yourself noted, Set.
And Robert didn't write 'of him'. His was,
I asked him a question.
Setanta: In common speech, it would be acceptable to omit the auxiliary verb. It might be argued that you need the auxiliary because the question is described as being uncomfortable to him in the past tense, as in "I had asked a question of him which was a bit uncomfortable"--but i'd say that one would only give consideration to that in formal, written English.
Nonsense, pure unadulterated nonsense. This has nothing at all to do with "common speech". Nor does it mean that you "need" had
"because the question is described as being uncomfortable to him in the past tense".
Of course it's in the past tense. Once asked
, it can't be anywhere else.
The speaker could have used the past perfect aspect "had asked", the present perfect aspect "have asked", or the simple past "asked". The verb 'has' is not an optional auxiliary in this case.
The choice of which to use would have to do with meaning/with semantic intent.
Let's put aside the "to him" issue for now. I would say that for me 'ask of someone' is the norm but it appears that 'ask to someone' is very common.
"I asked him a question which was a
The difference between the present perfect and the simple past is one of formality/current relevance-importance/repeated action/dialect difference.
The difference between the past perfect and the simple past is one of formality/emphasis/possible dialect difference/... .