Why direct and not indirect pronouns in this exercise?

Question

I just did an exercise in my textbook. The question was:

• Fede tiene muy buena relación con su madre, ¿no?

Sí, __ ve todos los días.

• Se nota que ___ quiere mucho.

I put le in both, because I read it as the direct object of tiene being 'muy buena relación' and the indirect object being 'su madre'.

However, the answer is la and la.

Can someone explain this to me gramatically? Why is the direct object su madre? Is relation in Spanish not a noun like it is in English? I know of laísmo, but this is not an example of it because it's a pretty formal textbook.

Answer 1

I put le in both, because I read it as the direct object of tiene being 'muy buena relación' and the indirect object being 'su madre'.

You are correct about the first part, but "con su madre" is a prepositional phrase, so "madre" here is not an indirect object.

La is correct for both of the other sentences because both ver and querer are transitive verbs, so they require an object, which in this case madre is represented by a pronoun. Madre can only use le when it is an indirect object. This is the grammatically correct usage.

Leísmo , however, can allow le when referring to people while being the direct object, although grammarians argue whether this is correct or not.

Answer 2

Thank you for a simple and easy to understand answer JulianChivi.

So in this case, "la" in the second and third sentences is not directly referring to the DO in the first sentence, but instead substituting for "madre" as in 'él ve a su madre todos los días', because it's clear to both parties who the 'la' is referring to, and that the subject is Fede, so clarification is not needed. Do I have that right?