4

I've always been a bit confused about when to use the indirect object pronoun le for persons. Specifically, is it necessary (or even forbidden) when specifying the person. e.g. Voy a visitarle a Pedro.

I've also seen lo and la (the direct object pronouns) used in place of le, for persons, and quite frequently so. What's up with this? Is it strictly correct? The only situation in which I can imagine this would be right is with the verb tener.

  • 3
    Interesting to read: leísmo, laísmo, loísmo – fedorqui 'SO stop harming' Sep 5 '16 at 14:23
  • 1
    Le / La / Lo is one of the most complicated subjects you could read about in spanish. Everybody does it wrong depending on the country and the part of the country you are in. I suggest you read that article. – darkgaze Sep 5 '16 at 14:37
  • Thanks. I had no idea it was such a tricky subject. Suppose I'll read the article and try to follow the RAE standard! – Noldorin Sep 5 '16 at 14:39
  • 1
  • I'm not sure I entirely agree with the duplicate, but I'm not sure if he's confused about when to use le/lo/la or when reduplication of the (in)direct pronoun is necessary. HOpefully he can clarify – user0721090601 Sep 5 '16 at 23:44
1

This is not an answer, but to give you some examples of how NOT to use this. LO is generic for objects. LE is always for masculine. The problem starts with femenine, because LA and LE is hard to distinguish:

Decirla algo (a ella): Never use "LA" for femenine indirect objects. Correct is generic for persons: DecirLE

But most of the times, you hear: Peinarla (a ella), which sounds completely perfect. And it shouldn't be right, but you hear it everywhere.

Voy al parque a cogerle = Always means a person, but some people use this for objects, which is wrong. Should be LO for objects.

| improve this answer | |

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.