Why is it "lo saluda" and not "le saludo"?
I was listening to BBC Mundo Radio and noticed that the announcer always begins the broadcast by saying, "Desde Londres, lo saluda [nombre]." Why does she say "lo saluda"? I know that this is how the phrase is commonly used in letters and such, but it sounds odd to me. Doesn't "lo saluda" mean "él/ella/Ud. greets it"? Why isn't it "le saludo," with an indirect object pronoun because what's being greeted is a person, and the verb in the first person, because the speaker is doing the greeting, and not someone else? Thanks.
Update: Thanks for all your answers. I asked this a while ago and then did a bit of research and figured it out, pretty much as most of you say. It has been a while since I had a formal Spanish class and the lines between direct and indirect object pronouns had blurred unduly. I had been too closely linking le with 'being for people' in my head, which it isn't always. Saludar is a transitive verb, so it takes a direct object (lo or la). And then there's leísmo, just to confuse things sometimes, which I think was what contributed to me thinking it should be le.
9 Answers
It probably depends on how you are translating "saludar".
Lo saludo.
If you are thinking of it as "I salute you" or "I greet you" then the d.o.p. would sound correct from an English standpoint.
If you are thinking of it as:
"I am saying hello to you" the i.o.p. probably sounds better.
Our dictionary gives an example of d.o.p. usage:
saluda a Ana de mi parte -> give my regards to Ana
notice the persona "a" (and no redundant i.o.p.) meaning that Ana is a direct object, not an indirect object in the sentence.
To reinforce that it may be a matter of choice, MacFadden seems to intuitively think an i.o.p. should be used in the context. Personally, my first reaction is that an d.o.p. should be used in such contexts. Just a matter of viewpoint?
Doesn't "lo saluda" mean "él/ella/Ud. greets it"?
Translate the lo as you rather than it and it might change your viewpoint, but I see no difference. In "he/she/you greets it" the it still looks like a d.o.p. to me.
I think it is mostly a matter of what you're used to saying, really. If I'm addresseing a mixed audience or someone of indeterminate gender, I would be more inclined to use "le". If I know my reader / listener is a man, I'll say "lo". - Gekkosan
Lo saluda can only be a man, le saluda ...is only incorrect
Actually, I am just kidding, as le is an "accepted" form of the direct object, but it is what we call "leísmo", which is an incorrect use of the pronoun. Only la or lo should be used, but especially in Madrid, the leísmo is a question of culture, lol. You can use the plural form. Les saluda (leísmo) los saluda (both men and women)
In Mexico the announcers usually say Les saluda [fulano de tal].
This is simply a very formal way of starting a presentation - putting the speaker in the third person (or forth, whichever it is) thereby making it impersonal. The announcer is reporting the news and not his/her opinions.
Perhaps it should be viewed more as an idiomatic expression rather than trying to understand a direct translation, some thing like the following:
yours faithfully - lo saluda atentamente,
su seguro servidor - yours sincerely,
lo saluda cordialmente - yours truly
lo saluda atentamente - su seguro servidor
Conventionally B.B.C foreign broadcasting is addressed not to a bunch of people but to a country. Q.E.D.
Btw. This is the second time the spell checker has hit me for using three upper case letters in a row. I reckon it needs its list of acceptable abbreviations updated.
Another interesting entry in my Gran Diccionario Oxford:
lo saluda atentamente (Corresp)
-Sincerely (yours) (AmE),
-Yours sincerely (BrE),
-Yours faithfully (BrE)
........not that I know what this means with respect to the question. In fact, it confuses me more, but I know that one just accepts some things.
An interesting entry from my Gran Diccionario Oxford:
(con un gesto): los saludó con la mano = she waved to them;
I'm 99% sure I read this in Pronouns Up Close by Practice Makes Perfect, and this is just a matter of speaker preference, but you can use "lo" when you would normally use "le" if the speaker is a male (you cannot do the same for "la", however). I would look up the passage for you, but it would take me a while to find it.
Whether you find the passage or not, does it not seem odd that an announcer on television would presume to be speaking only to one male?
I'm 99% sure I read this in Pronouns Up Close by Practice Makes Perfect, and this is just a matter of speaker preference, but you can use "lo" when you would normally use "le" if the speaker is a male (you cannot do the same for "la", however). I would look up the passage for you, but it would take me a while to find it.
