That's actually not a transitive usage. With movement verbs, を can mark an indirect object that the movement occurs through.
So, yes, 渡 (and many other intransitive movement verbs) can take an object marked by を, it's not a direct object.
Thsnk you for the quick clarification. I consulted with my Japanese teacher during a recent lesson before posting the comment and she too, thought it was transitive.
I do understand your argument about (in)direct objects, though. I will do some research by myself and follow up with my teacher to reach a common understanding.
You can find papers explaining and whatnot, but I think the simplest explanation is that if it were just another transitive usage of を, it wouldn't need its own definition in the dictionary. Both E-J dictionaries and monolingual dictionaries distinguish them.
As you can see in the entry for "を" it doesn't exclusively specify the object of a given sentence, but a few more things:
https://jisho.org/word/%E3%82%92
In general, just like in the west, verbs of movement are intrasitive verbs or 自動詞, to use the native term.
Yes, I understand. And for the purpose of language usage it's surely fine.
Being a rather science driven person, although not originally in the field of linguistics, I'd still be very interested in having a look at those papers. :)
Transitive/Intransitive
I was wondering why it is labeled as "intranstive" only. Shouldn't it be considered transitive as well? Something like 「橋を渡る」 seems to be fairly common usage.