A question about indirect object pronouns and IO or reflexive pronouns instead of possessive pronouns?Indirect objects/pronouns are clearly necessary in certain cases such as when pegar is used to mean "to hit" someone/something as in "Le pega al hermano" for "He hits his brother." (Golpear takes a direct object as in "Golpeo la pelota y ella la golpea también" as in "I hit the ball and she hits it too.")
However, when given the sentence (in Duolingo):
"Did you see the goalie stopping all of their penalties"
why are the translations:
1) "Viste al portero atajándoles/parándoles/deteniéndoles todos los penales" accepted
while the translations:
2) Viste al portero atajándo/parando/deteniendo todos sus penales aren't accepted?
I know that we use object pronouns in place of possessives with body parts most of the time and sometimes with clothing as in "Me pongo los guantes" for "I put on my gloves" but why #2 supposedly unacceptable (or is it acceptable also)?
Any help would be appreciated as I can find no clear explanation and most translators actually give #2 as the answer.
I don't understand me gustan with first person. Is this the formal version?
Can I opt out of using the vosotros form?
When do you use por in sentences and not para
"Mis padres se animaron con la visita de mis sobrinos." I don't understand why this is animarse. They aren't cheering themselves up, they're being cheered up by the visit of mis sobrinos.
In the example sentence, “ Tengo que ir al supermercado. Me falta fruta y carne.”, should the verb be faltan, since the subject of the sentence is fruta y carne?
Indirect objects/pronouns are clearly necessary in certain cases such as when pegar is used to mean "to hit" someone/something as in "Le pega al hermano" for "He hits his brother." (Golpear takes a direct object as in "Golpeo la pelota y ella la golpea también" as in "I hit the ball and she hits it too.")
However, when given the sentence (in Duolingo):
"Did you see the goalie stopping all of their penalties"
why are the translations:
1) "Viste al portero atajándoles/parándoles/deteniéndoles todos los penales" accepted
while the translations:
2) Viste al portero atajándo/parando/deteniendo todos sus penales aren't accepted?
I know that we use object pronouns in place of possessives with body parts most of the time and sometimes with clothing as in "Me pongo los guantes" for "I put on my gloves" but why #2 supposedly unacceptable (or is it acceptable also)?
Any help would be appreciated as I can find no clear explanation and most translators actually give #2 as the answer.
This seems like a useful phrase! A few questions...
• How common is it in Spanish?
• I guess we could just as easily use nouns like 'fracaso', 'dificultad' etc?
• It's similar to 'meet with success' in English of course, but would it be totally wrong to use 'con' in Spanish?
• And, does the noun usually carry the article? (conoce el éxito)
Saludos
I notice that in the test question "iba" was used, but in the example here the preterite "fueron" is used. How do we know which to use and when?
Question
Why is vosotros/cantais used in the second sentence? vs Tu siempre cantas la misma cancion?
Tu cantas opera - (you sing opera)
Vosotras siempre cantais la misma cancion - (you always sing the same song)
PS: accent marks won't work
In this sentence "Yo le doy el periódico al portero ahora."
Why do you need "le" to say "I am giving the newspaper to the doorman?" Couldn't you say "Yo doy el periódico al portero ahora."
I am giving the newspaper to the doorman now.Find your Spanish level for FREE
Test your Spanish to the CEFR standard
Find your Spanish level