Separated double object pronouns HI, I see this construction sometimes and very few info on it online. But sometimes two pronouns with two verbs in a sentence are separated with one before the first conjugated verb and other attached to the following infinitive verb. In my book for example - el pez numero catource-
1-- una vez la oí confesarle a Bernadette que tenía miedo de volver a equivocarse---
Why not, -- se la oí confesar ?
2-- Mi abuelo no contesta. Se limita a mirarlo con hostilidad.--
Why not: se lo limita a mirar?
What is this type of construction called?
Why separate them? Is this construction interchangeable with the traditional form of keeping pronouns together?
How common is it? I don't see it very often.
Thanks a lot
Hello,
I have these sentences from the exercise:
1. In addition, they improve colds. Además, mejoran los resfriados
2. They have vitamins and minerals. y tienen vitaminas y minerales
In sentence 1, though the English is 'colds' (without the article), the Spanish sentence has los resfriados
In sentence 2, both the English and Spanish do NOT have the articles.
Is there a rule for when to use the articles? Can you point me to some info?
Thank you
Amrutha
I think at first boyfriend. ... lol both muy and mucha in same sentence. I like that.
Que son los deportes officiales en paraguay?
"Tu coche no es muy nuevo aunque funcione/funciona estupendamente. (Your car is not very new although it works beautifully.)"
I chose the subjunctive "funcione" here because both the speaker and the listener would know about the car. But this was marked wrong. Why would the indicative be correct?
PS I just read your answer below that the speaker is simply making a declaration. In that case, how do we distinguish this from the case of the speaker stating shared information? It seems that both answers could be correct depending on how one interprets the speaker. This makes it hard to know which answer the system considers to be correct.
What is the difference between para la que and para el que.
Can someone please explain when we cannot use either of the two.
Gracias!
Las casas reales europeas están de visita oficial a Latinoamérica y esta noche va a haber una cena muy especial. Para este evento, la decoración va a ser muy elegante y el menú va a ser muy variado, con platos tradicionales de países latinoamericanos. Finalmente, va a haber música y un baile para disfrutar la noche.
I thought it stated that ninguna or ninguno could not be used with a nouns??
>In sentences where the indirect object is represented by "a + pronoun", and it is at the beginning of the sentence, for example "a mí, a tí, a ella", it is necessary to repeat the indirect object by using the "short" pronoun (me, te, le, nos, os, les) in the same sentence.
I think this should be reworded. That "and it is at the beginning of the sentence" makes it seem like you don't need the shrot pronoun if you put the "a + pronoun" elsewhere in the sentence. I know one of the examples and the little tip box later clarify this, but I still think rewording that paragraph would help.
HI, I see this construction sometimes and very few info on it online. But sometimes two pronouns with two verbs in a sentence are separated with one before the first conjugated verb and other attached to the following infinitive verb. In my book for example - el pez numero catource-
1-- una vez la oí confesarle a Bernadette que tenía miedo de volver a equivocarse---
Why not, -- se la oí confesar ?
2-- Mi abuelo no contesta. Se limita a mirarlo con hostilidad.--
Why not: se lo limita a mirar?
What is this type of construction called?
Why separate them? Is this construction interchangeable with the traditional form of keeping pronouns together?
How common is it? I don't see it very often.
Thanks a lot
Find your Spanish level for FREE
And get your personalised Study Plan to improve it
Find your Spanish level