7
That redundant direct object "lo" is obligatory, because "eso" is well-defined.
El doblado del complemento directo antepuesto al verbo es obligatorio:
A mis hijos los veo sólo los fines de semana.
Esta carta hay que mandarla hoy urgentemente.
A mi padre lo despidieron del trabajo.
Sus cartas las guardó toda su vida.
Que se había casado ...
6
Your sentence is an example of what is called "redundancia pronominal" or "reduplicación/doblado de clíticos": there is an object in the canonical position ("a su novia" in your case) and also a clitic pronoun ("le" in your case) with the same syntactic function. As explained in the Enciclopedia de lingüística hispánica, by several authors, it's a phenomenon ...
5
The pronoun los is optional in this case. It's not really redundant because the impersonal form of haber normally takes a direct object. The form without the pronoun is elliptical: the pronoun is suppressed because it's clear from context what is being referred to.
Note that hay is third person singular regardless of the noun that accompanies it, precisely ...
5
I would say they are definitely redundant, which is not to say that they are meaningless. It's hard to pinpoint it exactly but I think it has to do with definiteness.
... zapatos de gimnasia. Anthony los escogió blancos... Yo los escogí azules...
To me this redundant (and repeated) use of the pronoun los emphasizes the fact that the writer is referring ...
4
No, no y no.
Dice el DPD en su artículo coma:
1.2. Para separar o aislar elementos u oraciones dentro de un mismo enunciado
1.2.1. La coma separa los elementos de una enumeración, siempre que estos no sean complejos y ya contengan comas en su expresión, pues, en ese caso, se utiliza el punto y coma (→ punto y coma, 3a): Ayer me compré dos camisas, un ...
answered Jun 6 '18 at 14:26
fedorqui 'SO stop harming'
33.2k97 gold badges244 silver badges421 bronze badges
3
It may sound redundant –being optional, as the sentence would be still be understood without it– but having the pronoun (los) in place helps get the point across more effectively.
There are other similar cases where redundant object pronouns act beneficially, bringing a reinforced, straightforward reference.
Cuando encuentro buenos higos, los compro
...
2
Let's consider what the sentence would look like without the object pronoun "lo":
Eso decide la embajadora.
When the listener hears the beginning of that sentence, "Eso decide," it gives the impression that the sentence is going to be something like "That decides it [for me]," or "That clinches it." That would give the wrong impression, though, because ...
2
As a native speaker, you could say Miguel dio un anillo a su novia, but it sounds weird or strange. If you think deeply the meaning of Miguel le dio un anillo, I would ask to whom? and you would say a su novia. Even if le = a su novia, a su novia is clarifying le, that is, who is this 'le'? This sentence can sound well enough on its own but it does need a ...
2
No creo que ese "atrás "sea redundante necesariamente en todos los casos, si no una manera de aclarar "desde donde" se remonta o desambiguar posibles acepciones de "remontar". Además, "redundante" no quiere decir por necesidad "incorrecto".
Por ejemplo "Se remonta 200 años atrás (desde nuestros días)&...
2
No veo que sea redundante porque la definición de remontar no determina un marco de tiempo exacto.
Si remontar es «Retroceder hasta una época pasada» dicha época puede ser «años atrás», «décadas atrás», «siglos atrás», «eones atrás», etc.
Por lo anterior especificar que son solamente años no solo no me parece redundante sino necesario.
2
The original text in English:
So then we went to the shoe store to buy some sneakers. Anthony chose white ones with blue stripes; Nick chose red ones with white stripes. I chose blue ones with red stripes, but then the shoe man said, we're all sold out.
Note, the translator could have gone with the simpler expression
Anthony escogió blancos con rayas ...
Only top voted, non community-wiki answers of a minimum length are eligible