Direct or indirect object pronoun?

Question

I was reading on the personal "a" and it said that I listen to him is "Lo escucho a él". Why is it not "le escucho a él" because I thought indirect object pronouns always meant to/for whom and direct object pronouns are what are affected by the verb. So in my mind, saying "to him" would be an indirect object pronoun, hence the "le". I thought I understood all these pronouns really well until I came across this. Could someone please just explain to me why it's Lo escucho a él". Thank you!!

Answer 1

• Doesn't an indirect object take care of the to/for whom? - Quincyhopper 3 hrs ago flag

• I see how you're looking at it. "I give the book to him." What's the object of the action? (What do I give?) The book (direct object). "I listen to him." What's the object of the action? (To whom do I listen?) Him (direct object). - jtaniel 3 hrs ago flag

• That makes sense but I have definitely seen lessons on this website saying "I give the book to her" is "le doy el libro a ella". I'm sorry that I'm not understanding it, I'm just very confuse

"Listen" is an intransitive verb that cannot take a direct object. You cannot listen something. But you can listen.

"Listen to" is a prepositional verb that is transitive and requires a direct object. You cannot listen to. But you can listen to something.

The "to" added to listen converts it to the prepositional verb, and allows it to take a direct object, which follows the "to". The "to" here is an essential part of the prepositional verb, and cannot be separated. It does not belong to the object.

Give is verb that can be used both transitively and intransitively. You can give. And you can give something. So when you give something to someone, the "to" marks the indirect object, what you give is the direct object, who you give it to is the indirect object. Here the "to" belongs to the object, not the verb.

Like give hear works transitively and intransitively, but uses a different marker for the indirect- You can hear. You can hear him. But you would never hear to him- Instead you would hear from him, You can hear something from him. Something is the direct object and from marks the indirect. Note you cannot listen something to him.

Escuchar is most commonly used transitively and equates to "listen to" (although it can be used intransitively and equate to listen):

Escuchar música- to listen to music. Escucharla- to listen to it.

When "a" appears it is a personal "a" associated with a direct object:

Escuchar a Juan- To listen to Juan. Escucharlo- To listen to him.

I hope this helps, I am not good with English grammar and hopefully have not confused anything, perhaps Ian would have some input.

Here is a little English lesson on prepositional verbs if that helps.

https://www.englishclub.com/grammar/verbs-phrasal-verbs_1.htm

Sorry, I've just seen this now but this is one of the most helpful answers ever. Thank you !! - Quincyhopper, Nov 15, 2016

Answer 2

When we listen to something / someone the verb escuchar is a transitive verb so it requires a direct object. In your example él is the direct object, hence lo.

Thank you for the quick reply. So does the fact that it's "listen TO" is irrelevant? Does this also mean all transitive verbs require a direct object? - Quincyhopper, Oct 26, 2016

The definition of a transitive verb is that it requires a direct object. I don't know about "irrelevant," but to whom are you listening? That's a direct object. - jtaniel, Oct 26, 2016

Doesn't an indirect object take care of the to/for whom? - Quincyhopper, Oct 26, 2016

I see how you're looking at it. "I give the book to him." What's the object of the action? (What do I give?) The book (direct object). "I listen to him." What's the object of the action? (To whom do I listen?) Him (direct object). - jtaniel, Oct 26, 2016

That makes sense but I have definitely seen lessons on this website saying "I give the book to her" is "le doy el libro a ella". I'm sorry that I'm not understanding it, I'm just very confused - Quincyhopper, Oct 26, 2016

Answer 3

If I use escuchar with its secundary meaning of hear ( oir) I would use lo. An example. Mario llego muy tarde ayer a la noche , lo escuché ( better "oir" here) al entrar en casa.

yesterday mario arrived very late home I heard him entering at home.

If you use escuchar with the meaning of listen then you must use "le" because you are listening what he is saying. And here his speach is the d.o not he. An example.

Le estoy escuchando y me parece muy interesante lo que dice.

I am listening him and I think that is very interestering what he is saying

When I studied English I heard to my teacher,she got a powerful voice and I heard her very well , but I didn't listen her. this is the reason of my terrible English.

Cuando estudiaba inglés oía a mi profesora, tenía una poderosa voz y la oía muy bien, pero no le escuchaba. Esta es la razón de mi terrible inglés

Answer 4

Here is a really easy answer.

"Escuchar" without any preposition means "to listen to'" Escucho música Latina por la mañana. I listen to Latin music in the morning. (note NO preposition following "escucho")

When talking about a person a personal "a" is needed. Espero "a" María. "I'm waiting for Maria." (Note Espero means I wait for) no need to express "for." I wait for the bus. "Espero el autobús."

Continuing the bit about the personal "a," "Escucho a Luis". "I'm listening to Luis." The "a" in this sentence does not mean "to" or anything else for that matter. Whenever the direct object of ANY verb is a person ( a name or a person word) the personal "a" is needed.

With direct object pronouns it's different.

"¿Escuchaste a Trump anoche? (Answer) No, no lo escuché. Here "lo" is a direct object pronoun and doesn't require a personal "a."