why is there no indirect object pronoun in this sentence?

Question

Can anyone help me with this? In this sentence, there's no indirect object pronoun.... "La nina ha dado heno a los caballos." Im wondering if this is a mistake since the sentence,.." el hombre le esta leyendo al perro"...would indicate that even though the indirect object of the sentence is an animal, the pronoun "le" is required**?** **I**f so, shouldnt the first sentence read "la nina les ha dado heno a los caballos?"

Pleaser remember that correct spelling and capitalization are mandatory on this site, welcome to the forum:) - 00494d19, Jan 11, 2011

thanks joe:) - 00494d19, Jan 11, 2011

Answer 1

I would have said "les" too. The sentence as it is sounds odd.

Answer 2

I do not understand that rule, but that's what the instructor says. I've never seen it anywhere else. Maybe some advanced member can confirm the rule from another source.

i.o.p.

As some of the above examples indicate, an indirect-object pronoun is required whenever a sentence includes an indirect object. A further clause can be added for clarity or emphasis, but, unlike in English, an indirect pronoun is still required. For example, le escribí could mean "I wrote to him," "I wrote to her" or "I wrote to you," depending on the context. To clarify, we can add a prepositional phrase, as in le escribí a ella for "I wrote to her." Note that le is still required, even though a ella makes it redundant.

As a somewhat possible explanation of your example sentences, the "rule" that I have read is that the personal "a" is used for domestic animals that you have affection for (like pets). That would explain why the personal "a" was used with the dog, but not the horses. Horses can certainly be pets, but if this may be a large stable where other owner's horses are boarded or some similar situation where there may be no personal affection for the particluar horses.

I have to quit smoking that stuff. This doesn't even pertain to the above sentneces.

¡Bienvenido al foro!

Welcome to the forum!

Thanks all..... - scottsanowar, Jan 11, 2011

Thanks, Q! - 0066c384, Jan 11, 2011

Answer 3

Grammaticaly there should be an indirect object pronoun if there is an indirect object, even if the indirect object is explicitly stated. On the other hand, I frequently see and hear sentences that break this rule. It just proves that not everyone is always grammatically correct.

Actually, there are sentences where the duplication of the indirect object sounds weird, and it is even incorrect. The pronoun is duplicated in most cases, but not always. - lazarus1907, Jan 11, 2011

Is there any specific guideline, or do I just have to learn them all? - KevinB, Jan 11, 2011

Thanks, Kevin. I mentioned this because I, too, often hear sentences with indirect objects but without indirect object pronouns. - 0066c384, Jan 11, 2011

The explanation will not fit in this comment box. I'll open a new thread when I feel brave enough to attempt to explain it. It is rather complicated, I'm afraid. - lazarus1907, Jan 11, 2011

Answer 4

Have you watched the video on this site under the "Learn Spanish" section 2.3? Here is a link

link text

In the video, the instructor gives examples of sentences having indirect objects with no indirect object pronoun. At time 12:30, she gives a rule that "if you have an indirect object, you must always have an indirect object pronoun. Always!"

I do not understand that rule, but that's what the instructor says. I've never seen it anywhere else. Maybe some advanced member can confirm the rule from another source.

It is not a rule, but a practical advice, because the duplication occurs in most cases. - lazarus1907, Jan 11, 2011

Thanks, lazarus! - 0066c384, Jan 11, 2011