no les voy a invitar

Discussion in 'Spanish-English Grammar / Gramática Español-Inglés' started by rthomes, Jul 16, 2011.

  1. rthomes Senior Member

    english
    I am trying to understand direct and indiect object pronouns and I dont understand the use of les in this sentence I found
    No voy a invitar a Pedro y Ernesto a la fiesta
    No les voy a invitar a la fiesta
    is pedro y ernesto a indirect object please explain
     
  2. Magnalp

    Magnalp Senior Member

    Español - México
    No, it is direct (Pedro and Ernesto are invited). This is known as leísmo, the use of the dative where it corresponds to use the direct object pronouns, something normal in Spain...
     
  3. gengo

    gengo Senior Member

    Well, in certain countries there is a tendency to use IO pronouns. This is called leísmo. In other countries, a DO pronoun would be used. In those countries, the second sentence would be "No los voy a invitar a la fiesta."
     
  4. chamyto

    chamyto Senior Member

    Burgos, Spain
    Spanish
    Bear in mind that,according to RAE,only "le" as a direct object ,not "les" (with persons) is admisible.Le/les as DO is very common where I live in everyday Spanish.I usually say in speech ,although I know that it´s a mistake.
     
  5. MadinaUS Senior Member

    West Coast, US
    American / United States / CA English
    So, if I'm speaking Spanish as a second language, is it okay for me to justify my "leísmo" because I'm too lazy to think it through ("Does invitar take a direct or indirect object" I invited him. Oh! D.O. Thus, La/Lo) Lol - so much thinking! I want to say it correctly, there must be a better way. :D I wish they would tell you in the dictionary that "invitar" takes a D.O. I guess there are only a few verbs that are not like that (escribir - write the letter to him, dar - give the gift to him, etc ) Maybe I'll look for a list. :) I did a research paper about this "Leísmo" phenomenon. Do all Spaniards use it "incorrectly"? Very interesting. I used to live in Spain. <3
     
  6. Julvenzor

    Julvenzor Senior Member

    Sevilla
    Español propio (Andalucía, España)

    Hi, MadinaUS,

    "All" not. I'm Spaniard and use them correctly. It's a complex phenomenon, difficult to explain. There is much information posted on the forum.

    Cheers!
     
  7. MadinaUS Senior Member

    West Coast, US
    American / United States / CA English
    Oh, I'm well aware of the phenomenon. I've read countless academic articles on them, but I still have questions, of course. ;)
     
  8. gengo

    gengo Senior Member

    Only a few? Hardly. There are countless such verbs, and in the vast majority of cases it is perfectly obvious. The direct object of escribir is what you write (a letter, etc.), and you obviously can't write a person as a direct object. You may be getting confused because in English we are much vaguer about this, and can say things like "I wrote her yesterday." That "her" looks like a DO, but is of course an IO.

    Personally, I don't worry too much about leísmo because where I (and you) live it doesn't come up much. I try (and usually fail) to speak like a well educated Mexican, and I think everyone should choose a "flavor" of Spanish with which they identify most closely, and stick to that one. If you plan to spend time in Spain, you'll want to be familiar with leísmo, and you can get practice by reading Spanish blogs and news articles, watching Spanish movies, and so on.
     
  9. MadinaUS Senior Member

    West Coast, US
    American / United States / CA English
    I completely understand Leísmo and grammar. I'm just saying, sometimes, in that moment of choosing "le" or "lo", I stop for a moment to think. (Yeah, sure, there are MANY verbs, but what I'm saying, as a Spanish teacher, is that it would be more helpful to learn it in a systematic way. Create a list and go from there.) Obviously, "leísmo" reflects the wrong grammar, so I would never practice that. (Leísmo is a natural reflection of the simplification of language overtime. Just as, overtime, English has lost most of it's subjunctive mood usage...Languages simply simplify.) I know you can't write a person as a direct object, but obviously when you speak (or write), you're focussing on content, not necessarily on the grammar in that moment.
     
  10. Julvenzor

    Julvenzor Senior Member

    Sevilla
    Español propio (Andalucía, España)

    I'm totally agree with that. To me, it's a phenomenon causing impoverishment in my language. But not everybody thinks so and less in Madrid.

    A pleasure.
     
    Last edited: May 2, 2013
  11. MadinaUS Senior Member

    West Coast, US
    American / United States / CA English
  12. autrex2811

    autrex2811 Senior Member

    Toluca, México
    Español-castellano, son lo mismo
    Para que no se confunda y no se complique la vida, diga: No los voy a invitar a la fiesta (a Pedro y a Ernesto). Pedro y Ernesto son complementos de acusativo (objeto directo)

    Como Pedro y Ernesto son complementos de acusativo, pregúntese: ¿A quiénes no voy a invitar? A ellos, a Pedro y a Ernesto

    Cuando se trata de complemento de dativo, pregúntese "a quién(es) le(s) + el verbo de la oración": La mezzsoprano cantó un aria al público que la aclamaba / La mezzosoprano le cantó un aria. ¿A quién le cantó un aria la mezzosoprano? (Al público que la aclamaba) Complemento de dativo (objeto indirecto). Como el verbo en la pregunta acepta "le" entonces hablamos de un dativo u objeto indirecto.

    En resumen: la, lo, los son pronombres de acusativo; y le, les son pronombres de dativo
    Ese fenómeno del leísmo ya después lo comprenderá y se dará cuenta qué usos tiene.

    Hay mucha diferencia entre usar "les" y "los":
    No les voy a invitar un helado (a ustedes / a ellos)
    No los voy a invitar a mi fiesta (a ustedes / a ellos)
     
    Last edited: May 3, 2013
  13. MadinaUS Senior Member

    West Coast, US
    American / United States / CA English
    I understand the grammar. I'm just talking about that split second of doubt when you're talking or writing when you don't want to stop and think about it. (To have already learned it flat out is better.) (I wrote a paper and a did presentation about this ;))
     
  14. MadinaUS Senior Member

    West Coast, US
    American / United States / CA English
    Did anyone look at the link? Let me know if you think it's good. I think it's great, so far. It's a "wikilink" or something, so I wasn't sure if anything "wiki" is completely legit. (legitimate)
     
  15. Peterdg

    Peterdg Senior Member

    Belgium
    Dutch - Belgium
    I read it and all they say is correct but there is much more to say about it (but can one expect from a webpage that it treats it in all its complexity?)
     
  16. MadinaUS Senior Member

    West Coast, US
    American / United States / CA English
    Oh, yes, there is much more to say, but it's a great reference. Thank you.
     
  17. inib

    inib Senior Member

    La Rioja, Spain
    British English
    Am I missing the point? Most dictionaries will tell you if a verb is transitive.
     
  18. gengo

    gengo Senior Member

    Indeed. The following is from the WR dictionary, and gives both forms of the verb.

    invitar vtr (convidar) invite vtr
    Note: Seguido de la preposición "a".
    Mis amigos nos invitaron a comer.
    invitar vi (incitar) invite vi
    El calor invita a que nos demos un baño.
     
  19. inib

    inib Senior Member

    La Rioja, Spain
    British English
    Yes, perhaps I should have said "...if a verb can be used transitively".
     
  20. MadinaUS Senior Member

    West Coast, US
    American / United States / CA English
    There are tree types of verbs: Transitive, Intransitive, and Transitive verbs that have both a Direct and Indirect object. I hope I enlightened you. :D Anyway, none of you guys are getting the point. It's not about understanding the grammar intellectually, it's about accessing the information at a split second's notice without having to think about it! ;)
     
    Last edited by a moderator: May 4, 2013
  21. inib

    inib Senior Member

    La Rioja, Spain
    British English
    Sorry Madina. I didn't mean to underestimate your knowledge, and I understand your point about quick thinking. I only answered your comment about the dictionaries, and still feel that it is valid.
     
  22. echinocereus Senior Member

    English United States
    Hi, MadinaUS, I think it is unlikely that a non-native speaker of a foreign language, no matter how much he/she studies, reads, listens and practices speaking that foreign language, will ever make usage decisions so effortlessly, so intuitively, “in a split second,” as you say, as does a native speaker of that language. Would that it were not so... :)
     
    Last edited: May 3, 2013
  23. MadinaUS Senior Member

    West Coast, US
    American / United States / CA English
    No les voy a invitar un helado. <¿Qué quiere decir?
     
  24. autrex2811

    autrex2811 Senior Member

    Toluca, México
    Español-castellano, son lo mismo
    Que a ustedes no les compraré un helado. Si omitimos "a ustedes", queda una oración congruente, pero así en este contexto estaría libre para inferirse que se habla de "ustedes o ellos"
     
  25. gengo

    gengo Senior Member

    Remember that invitar can mean to treat someone to something.

    Te invito = My treat / It's on me
    A esta ronda invito yo = This round's on me

    So your sentence means "I'm not going to treat you/them to an ice cream."
     
  26. MadinaUS Senior Member

    West Coast, US
    American / United States / CA English
    Entonces:

    -No los invité a la fiesta.(I did not invite them to the party) (The double component THEM and TO THE PARTY is where one might think that it could be "les", just thinking about it quickly. "To the party" part would be a prepositional phrase, correct -- but what would it's relationship be to "invité"? Would it be an adverbial phrase, giving more information? Because what one might think, when thinking quickly, instinctively is that there is a DO/ IO relationship here. When you think about it for longer, it wouldn't make sense. I invited them. (Direct object) ...Now adding "to the party" makes it seem like it could be a "les" situation...I guess the take home question is what is "to the party" grammatically?

    -No les invité a un helado (a Pedro y a Juan) (I didn't invite them to an ice cream / I didn't offer an ice cream to them -- to retain the indirect object nature of Pedro and Juan. So, in this instance "ice cream" is obviously DO and Pedro & Juan are Indirecto. But translated how it is originally, it would be I didn't invite them TO AN ICE CREAM. Making it seem like "Pedro & Juan" would still be "los" and "a un helado" is a prepositional phrase and whatever "to the party" is above.

    I hope I am making myself clear. The question I am asking is very subtle, and unless you know enough grammar, the question is probably not even clear.

    (The dirty clothes were on the floor. >>
    1. The dirty clothes = subject
    2. were = verb
    3. On the floor is the PREDICATE to "were", if I'm not mistaken....sometimes the difference between complements and predicates can be tricky?

    Anywho, the reason I gave the above example is because if you can identify the parts of a sentence and know what they are, then you can identify correct usage. I hope that made sense to ya'll. :) Thanks.

    (I treated an ice cream to them* -- obviously incorrect word order -- but makes it easier to think about DO + IO
    (I wrote the letter to her -- DO + IO -- Just looking at it on a thinking level of figuring the words.

    In Spanish movies, do they employ Leísmo? (Todos los hombres sois iguales is one of my favorites!) another way to "figure" this out is to not think about it and hope you're exposed to enough language for it to sink in. :)

    Okay, this got really long! Forgive me.
     
  27. MadinaUS Senior Member

    West Coast, US
    American / United States / CA English
    And wouldn't it be:

    No les voy a invitar a un helado
    I am not going to invite them to an ice cream ??

    Also, above, when I said "A Pedro y a Juan" -- Do you need both "a's" or is the first sufficient?

    Thank you,
    MD
     
  28. MadinaUS Senior Member

    West Coast, US
    American / United States / CA English
    Yes, I am in the process of packaging it. Thanks for your support. :)

    - A who / whom error isn't that big of a deal
    - Apparently a le / lo error isn't that big of a deal either now that people consistently use it incorrectly in Spain and no meaning is lost -- It is still interesting to understand the grammar behind it, understand it well, practice, then apply/ produce it.
    - Her and I went shopping / She and I went shopping -- obviously, the second is correct, but both uses are observed > No huge problems/ minor grammar error. But for the L2 learner, it is important to understand language structures as much as possible (she - subject/ doer; her - object / receiver)so that they're language is as close to error free as possible because it gives them more confidence.
    I don't worry -- and yes, I do have a higher standard then most people. Most people don't worry about my "lo" and "le" usage, especially not in Spain, (or anywhere for that matter), but as a linguist/ grammarian / language aficionado / scholar/ SLA specialist / teacher, it's important to know more and not less.
    I genuinely wish you (all) all the best in your SLA goals. It's obviously a topic we're all passionate about and we're all trying to improve our abilities in our L2 or just trying to help other people.

    Saludos cordiales,
    Madina
     
    Last edited by a moderator: May 4, 2013
  29. Julvenzor

    Julvenzor Senior Member

    Sevilla
    Español propio (Andalucía, España)

    Hola, Madina:


    No sé si sólo está ofreciendo ejemplos de uso, o si considera que así funciona. En resumen, esa "a" que va con Juan y Pedro es la "a" personal. Ambos siguen siendo OD. La estructura del verbo es un tanto especial: invitar a alguien (OD) a algo (C.régimen).

    Un saludo cordial.
     
  30. MadinaUS Senior Member

    West Coast, US
    American / United States / CA English
    1. ¿Hay que poner la "a" personal dos veces? (Esa fue mi pregunta implícita ;))

    2. Otro forero (¿Autrex?) dijo que en el ejemplo: "Les invité a un helado" (a Juan y a Pedro) que "Juan y Pedro" se convierten en "objeto indirecto". Y si no es el caso, ¿para qué usar "les" (pronombre de objeto indirecto)?

    3. Perdón, no entiendo lo del: "C. régimen".

    3. invitar a alguien (OD) a algo (C.régimen).
    Por eso, al usar "invitar", ¿nunca lo va a usar con "les"?...¿La persona siempre será OD?
    y la segunda parte, "a algo", ¿cómo lo describimos gramáticamente?

    Muchas gracias por fijarse en el tema.
    Saludos,
    MD
     
  31. autrex2811

    autrex2811 Senior Member

    Toluca, México
    Español-castellano, son lo mismo
    Sí, hay que poner la doble "a". En el enunciado "Les invité un helado a Pedro y a Juan", Pedro y Juan son el complemento de dativo u objeto indirecto porque en ellos recae la acción del verbo de forma indirecta; en tanto que "un helado" sería el complemento de acusativo u objeto directo. Ese "les" se refiere "a Pedro y a Juan". ¿Cuál es en sí aquí la duda?

    Ya no sería muy aceptable si se dijera: "Los invité un helado a Pedro y a Juan"
    :cross:

    Pero en el enunciado "Los invité a mi fiesta (a Pedro y a Juan)" :tick: la acción del verbo recae en ellos directamente, por lo que "a Pedro y a Juan" pasan a ser complementos de acusativo.

    En resumidas cuentas diríamos que:
    "Invitarle algo a alguien", es claramente el uso de un dativo, mientras que "invitar a alguien a algo (algún lado)" requiere el uso de un acusativo.
     
    Last edited: May 3, 2013
  32. MadinaUS Senior Member

    West Coast, US
    American / United States / CA English
    El otro forero dijo lo opuesto. ??

    2. Les invité A un helado A Pedro y A Juan. ??

    (Mi maestra mi dijo una vez que lo siguiente es incorrecto
    1. Invité a Juan y a Pedro (que se requiere el pronombre) - I invited Pedro and Juan
    2. Los invité a Juan y a Pedro (si se pone el pronombre, no se pone lo original, ¿cómo se llamaría?, lo de Pedro y Juan, el sustantivo original?)
     
  33. dexterciyo

    dexterciyo Senior Member

    Londres
    Español - Canarias
    Más información:

    http://lema.rae.es/dpd/?key=invitar

    http://lema.rae.es/dpd/srv/search?id=DRC2Ny6YAD6yEoSWaX#4b
     
  34. autrex2811

    autrex2811 Senior Member

    Toluca, México
    Español-castellano, son lo mismo
    Pues dígale a su maestra que a ver si podemos platicar un poco. Las dos opciones de arriba son "correctísimas"; mas tómese en cuenta que el complemento nos lo cambia todo:

    Invité a Juan y a Pedro (a mi casa / a la reunión / a tomar un helado)
    Los invité, a Pedro y a Juan, a mi casa / a la reunión / a (tomar) un helado / a (tomarnos) un té. Si el contexto nos permite omitir "a Pedro y a Juan", se puede hacer sin ningún problema. Se conservan en caso de que se quiera especificar que únicamente a ellos los invité; y tampoco habría ningún problema.

    PERO:

    (A Pedro y a Juan) les invité un perro caliente / unas aguas frescas / unos refrescos / unas empanadas. :tick:

    (A Pedro y a Juan) los invité a comernos un perro caliente / a (tomarnos) unas aguas frescas / a (comernos) unas empanadas.:tick:

    ... los invité unos perros calientes / unas aguas frescas / un té / unas empanadas :cross: (A esto se le llama "loísmo")
     
    Last edited: May 4, 2013
  35. Peterdg

    Peterdg Senior Member

    Belgium
    Dutch - Belgium
    Autrex,

    Siento mucho discrepar: la frase 1 es correcta, la 2 no (salvo en México; y lo digo en serio: en México es frecuente reduplicar el OD tónico con un pronombre átono ("los" en este caso), pero en la mayoría del ámbito hispanohablante, no se acepta la reduplicación del OD en este caso). Lo que sería correcto es: A Juan y a Pedro los invité...
    Es decir que la reduplicación del OD sólo es posible si el OD tónico (a Juan y a Pedro) se encuentra en posición antepuesta al verbo.
     
  36. SevenDays Senior Member

    Spanish
    Si preguntas, ¿qué/quién es lo invitado?, te darás cuenta que el objeto directo de "invité" siempre es "Pedro y Juan" (con la marca de OD "a") y "los", pues lo invitado no es "unos perros calientes", "un té", etc.
    Los invité unos perros calientes
    Esto no es loísmo; lo que pasa es que la oración no está bien construida, ya que "unos perros calientes" no es el objeto directo de "invité" sino de un infinitivo de finalidad que está omitido:
    Los invité a comer unos perros calientes
    Para evitar problemas, no omitamos el infinitivo, y así podremos ver la naturaleza sintáctica de "unos perros calientes" (OD del infinitivo).
    Saludos
     
  37. MadinaUS Senior Member

    West Coast, US
    American / United States / CA English
    To everyone here who actually tried to answer my question and understand it -- thank you! I will re-read the in-depth grammar posts as soon as I can and respond to those important ones so that anyone who sees this forum may benefit. :)
     
  38. Nipnip Senior Member

    Español
    Many good points raised here:


    • The always condescending tone of some foreros to new memebers.
    • Their anticipation about the nature and scope of the question, even if it is not remotely related to what the OP needs.
    • The use of the verb "invitar".

    Madina, en México y buena parte de América, invitar -when meaning to treat- works exactly as the verb dar, for they also have the same meaning.

    I had posted a similar example in a different thread. Talking about Marta:

    La invité a un café. I invited her to a coffee shop
    Le invité un café.
    I treated her to a (cup/mug of) coffee.

    Para clarificar, la respuesta a la pregunta de StevenDays, en México obviamente lo que es invitado es el objeto, el café. Hay que entender que no se tiene ninguna confusión respecto a esto, invitar es dar; por el mismo motivo no requiere de la preposición "a". Se llega a ver y decir, pero es por una elipsis: Les invité a (tomar) un café. En este caso sí hay leísmo y debió haberse dicho: los invité.

    Espero que hayas resolvido* tus dudas y también que tengas siempre en cuenta, que aunque un forero de alguna geografía particular te diga que algo es "correcto", es mejor recurrir a personas del país o región que te interesa, pues sin duda habrá divergencias. También puedes apoyarte del DPD o la RAE, esto que explico ya lo había citado Dexter.

    Saludos.


    Peter: La duplicación de la que hablas no es ni común ni usual en México, el ejemplo que pone el otro forero sí es posible sólo cuando por algún motivo, por ejemplo, aclaración, se abre un parentésis.

    Los invité (me doy cuenta de que mi interlocutor no sabe de quién hablo, así es que agrego) a Juan y Pedro, a un café.
    Fuera de estos casos no es para nada usual, de hecho brinca mucho. Es algo que más bien he notado en el habla argentina.

    Edito: Agregar bullet points y aceptar comentarios acerca de resolvido en vez de resuelto, que leyendo el post, me brinca.
     
    Last edited: May 4, 2013
  39. autrex2811

    autrex2811 Senior Member

    Toluca, México
    Español-castellano, son lo mismo
    Aquí sí también discreparé. Si yo pregunto: "¿A quiénes les invité unos perros calientes" A ellos (a Pedro y a Juan, a mis amigos) / ustedes. Claramente es un dativo. Mas si pregunto "¿Qué les invité a ellos?" Unos perros calientes, esto es un acusativo u objeto directo. Hay que tener en cuenta que tanto el acusativo y el dativo pueden llevar la preposición "a", pero en el análisis de identificación ya se dará uno cuenta de cuál es cuál.

    "Los invité unos perros calientes", según lo leyera en un diccionario de lingüística, se trata de un uso diferente y no normativo. Digo, si así hay quienes de repente hablen, pues ya ni cómo criticarlos; es una forma un tanto peculiar, que al menos yo en mi vida jamás había oído. Así les tocó aprendérselo y ni modo.

    Ahora bien, veamos que:
    "Les invité unos perros calientes", no es precisamente lo mismo que "Los invité a comer unos perros calientes".
     
    Last edited: May 4, 2013
  40. autrex2811

    autrex2811 Senior Member

    Toluca, México
    Español-castellano, son lo mismo
    He aquí lo que una forera escribiera con mucho acierto:

    Peter: La duplicación de la que hablas no es ni común ni usual en México, el ejemplo que pone el otro forero sí es posible sólo cuando por algún motivo, por ejemplo, aclaración, se abre un paréntesis.

    Los invité (me doy cuenta de que mi interlocutor no sabe de quién hablo, así es que agrego) a Juan y Pedro, a un café.
    Fuera de estos casos no es para nada usual, de hecho brinca mucho. Es algo que más bien he notado en el habla argentina.

    Yo agregaría que también en otros lados.
     
  41. autrex2811

    autrex2811 Senior Member

    Toluca, México
    Español-castellano, son lo mismo
    Pero es que hay que ver que no es lo mismo "A Juan y a Pedro los invité" que "Los invité, a Pedro y a Juan".
     
  42. Peterdg

    Peterdg Senior Member

    Belgium
    Dutch - Belgium
    Es la coma que hace la diferencia.
     
  43. _SantiWR_ Senior Member

    Spanish - Spain
    I think that your question is more about language learning than language usage, so I'm not even sure it is within the scope of these forums. Anyway, if you are interested, we talk about fluency and proficiency a lot in this other site: http://how-to-learn-any-language.com/forum/default.asp
     
  44. MadinaUS Senior Member

    West Coast, US
    American / United States / CA English
    Thanks for the site recommendation. I am in the process of checking it out. How do you like that site?

    (Maybe I should have asked my question in the "Grammar Forums" section. I wasn't even the OP -- I just made a comment, not knowing that people would respond and so many did and it went on and on and expanded :) and I was able to receive a lot of useful responses that I will study closely.) I often ask questions of this nature on this forum and get some great answers. For some reason, it got so involved in this thread. Anywho, thanks again! (Who knew pronouns could be so polemic! :D)

    :)md
     

Share This Page