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
Have just realised that all 8 lessons Kwiziq recently added to my study plan all say for South American learners in red at the top of the first page. I am learning European which Kwiziq acknowledges. I’m not sure what to do!
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
In a grammar textbook, I ran across the structure "la + de + nombre + que + verbo (+ sujeto) (+ tiempo o lugar)" as an intensifier. Does this have the same function as "qué de"?
Hola!
I'm having a hard time wrapping my mind around the purpose of doubling down on the indirect object usage in some of these examples:
"Ella le envió un regalo a Miguel.
She sent a present to Miguel."
In this example, why do you need the le if you already have Miguel. It reads to me literally as "she him sent a present to Miguel" and I suppose it feels like excessive and unnecessary additional language in an already clear sentence. Is it for emphasis? Por favor ayúdame a entender.
wouldn't "on the other hand" be a better translation for: por otro lado?
why do we use preterito perfecto compuesto for 'I saw' and 'I found', i thought 'i found' would be encontre and 'I saw', yo vi not he contrado and he visto. thanks!
All the examples are in the present tense. Can this work in other tenses also?
Hola Inma,
Yo usé se volveré en este frase.
¿Hay alguna razón específica para usar convertirse? Saludos y feliz el año nuevo. John
Find your Spanish level for FREE
Test your Spanish to the CEFR standard
Find your Spanish level