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 know how Duolingo operates when giving alternative answers, but those two sentences are equally correct.
The first one is simply adding the "les" as an indirect object pronoun, referring to the "players who were shooting the penalties" - so the translation is "You saw the goalkeeper stopping all the penalties from them" This "from them" is what that "les" represents.
If you use the possessive, "sus penaltis", then that "les" is a bit redundant because with "sus" it's clear that the penalties are from them (the players shooting).
I hope this helped.
Sign in to submit your answer
Don't have an account yet? Join today
Test your Spanish to the CEFR standard