9

La madre le lava la cara a la niña.

In that sentence, why is the word "le" there? The sentence already has a indirect object ("a la niña"), but removing the "le" makes the sentence to sound unnatural.

Edit: Does this sentence sound right? Why/why not?

La madre lava la cara a la niña.

2

A few observations: you have a direct object and an indirect object in your sentence. Just go to the passive voice:

La cara (de la niña) es lavada por la madre.

So, "la cara" is the direct object. You can now replace the indirect object by "le"

La cara le es lavada por la madre.

If you omit "le", the subject disappears:

La cara es lavada por la madre.

so, "le" means "la niña", and can be omited in the original sentence.

From the DICCIONARIO PANHISPÁNICO DE DUDAS

d) Hay verbos que se construyen con complemento directo de cosa e indirecto de persona: El camarero sirvió la cerveza a Pedro; Robaron el bolso a María; El atracador pegó una paliza a la dependienta; El acusado escribió una carta al juez; El médico curó la herida al torero, etc.

| improve this answer | |
  • So in the passive-voice sentence "le" can be omitted. What about the original sentence? – dusan Nov 26 '11 at 13:23
  • @dusan You can omit it in the original sentence, as shown in the examples at the bottom of my answer. If you omit it in the passive voice, there is a slight sense change . Edited for clarity. – Dr. belisarius Nov 26 '11 at 13:44
  • @belisarius you're welcome. :) – Alenanno Nov 26 '11 at 15:54

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.