Quien compras los bilettes a nosotros
I have been studying indirect and direct object prounons. I have produced a response to my question above, can you advice if its okay.
My answer
nos los compro
thanks for your help.
22 Answers
Does it make sense'
Yes, thank you for clearing that up!!
Synthetic languages like Latin can afford to be flexible in the order of some elements, because its suffixes provide unequivocal relationships that otherwise would have to be understood by imposing certain limitations in the order of the elements, or by context, or both. English greatly simplified its structure by getting rid of these inflexions, but in turn it had to introduce some auxiliary words (e.g. do) and impose restrictions on the word order to ensure understanding. You gain something, you lose something.
lazarus1907 said:
but the verb refers only to me, so this sequence is unacceptable.
Super cool! So the IO is not simply a dative of benefit. As long as the verb does not imply my participation, the 'nos' would be considered exactly equivalent to "para nosotros". The implication being that the 'nos' is tied to the verb (and has implications beyond those implied by an IO in English). If I remembered more of Latin than I, in fact do, I'd ask for a translation in Latin (my sense being that Latin was more flexible with such constructions).
James Santiago said:
When you use "it" (or "them" and other such DO pronouns), you have to use "for."
I know, James, and so must you in Spanish (i.e. "para") when deictic references are overlapping. I was being sarcastic on purpose, showing that in English there are also some pronominal restrictions that are solved by avoiding pronouns, and using "for" instead, like we use "para" in Spanish.
You must say "I bought it for us", and not "I bought it for us" (this is actually allowed in Spanish)
You must say "Los compré para nosotros", and not "Nos los compré".
I just didn't like the comment, because it seemed to suggest that English was superior when it comes to logic, but all languages have these sort of peculiarities, and English is not exactly an exception to the rule. The most absurd thing about the criticism is that English has actually more restrictions in the use of pronouns than Spanish (for obvious reasons).
I bought us an extra large popcorn = I bought it us
And ,of course, you can also say "I bought us it", all using pronouns.
When you use "it" (or "them" and other such DO pronouns), you have to use "for."
I bought it for us.
I bought it for him.
I bought it for myself.
I bought them for us.
I bought them for her.
You can omit the preposition with other pronouns, however.
I bought us those. (Or, I bought those for us)
I bought her those.
The DO must always come after the IO, so "I bought it us" is incorrect in two ways.
Quentin said:
It makes perfect sense, but is that just something that occurs in Spanish.I bought us an extra large popcorn etc.
Very good! So, you surely can say:
I bought us an extra large popcorn = I bought it us
And ,of course, you can also say "I bought us it", all using pronouns, not like in Spanish, where these restrictions apply.
Did you buy them us? Did you buy us them? Hold on! You can actually say these in Spanish:
¿Nos las compraste?
Why can't you say this inEnglish? These things only happen in English!
It makes perfect sense, but is that just something that occurs in Spanish. I've never heard anyone object to someone saying in English or
I made us a home that we can be proud of..., I bought us an extra large popcorn etc.
lazarus1907 said:
Ok, I should have explained this before:Clitics (these kind of DO, IO pronouns) cannot have overlapping references, i.e. if the verb refers to "tú", you cannot use "vosotros" or "ustedes" at the same time, because "tú" is included in the other reference, so it is either one, or the other, but not both:'Te veo compraros un coche (VERY WRONG!) - Te = a ti, and compraros = vosotrosIn "'Nos lo compro", "nos" refers to both me and the others -within which I am included-, but the verb refers only to me, so this sequence is unacceptable. You can mix "yo" and "tú", "él", "usted", "ustedes", "vosotros" and "ellos", because "yo" is not in any of those groups, but mix "yo" with "nosotros", "tú" with "voosotros" (o "ustedes"), and things start going wrong.As a consequence, in a sentence like:(Ellas) La vieron comprarse unos zapatos."Ellas" can never include "her", so you can't assume that her and other women -at the same time- saw her shopping. That "la" must be different from "ellas".In "¿Quién nos compra los billetes'", we are expecting this "quién" to be someone not included in "nos" (us). If one of us is going to buy it, this person must rephrase the sentence to separate himself (or herself) from this "nos", or avoid clitics (DO and IO) altogether using "para nosotros", which is why I suggested that.Does it make sense?
>
lazarus1907 said:
Ok, I should have explained this before:
Clitics (these kind of DO, IO pronouns) cannot have overlapping references, i.e. if the verb refers to "tú", you cannot use "vosotros" or "ustedes" at the same time, because "tú" is included in the other reference, so it is either one, or the other, but not both:
'Te veo compraros un coche (VERY WRONG!) - Te = a ti, and compraros = vosotros
In "'Nos lo compro", "nos" refers to both me and the others -within which I am included-, but the verb refers only to me, so this sequence is unacceptable. You can mix "yo" and "tú", "él", "usted", "ustedes", "vosotros" and "ellos", because "yo" is not in any of those groups, but mix "yo" with "nosotros", "tú" with "voosotros" (o "ustedes"), and things start going wrong.
As a consequence, in a sentence like:
(Ellas) La vieron comprarse unos zapatos.
"Ellas" can never include "her", so you can't assume that her and other women -at the same time- saw her shopping. That "la" must be different from "ellas".
In "¿Quién nos compra los billetes'", we are expecting this "quién" to be someone not included in "nos" (us). If one of us is going to buy it, this person must rephrase the sentence to separate himself (or herself) from this "nos", or avoid clitics (DO and IO) altogether using "para nosotros", which is why I suggested that.
Does it make sense?
Mi maestro lazarus, your explanation really made sense to me and thanks for it.
Marco
Does it make sense'
Yes, it does, and you are probably the only person on this forum who could have explained it so that it did make sense.
Thank you.
Ok, I should have explained this before:
Clitics (these kind of DO, IO pronouns) cannot have overlapping references, i.e. if the verb refers to "tú", you cannot use "vosotros" or "ustedes" at the same time, because "tú" is included in the other reference, so it is either one, or the other, but not both:
'Te veo compraros un coche (VERY WRONG!) - Te = a ti, and compraros = vosotros
In "'Nos lo compro", "nos" refers to both me and the others -within which I am included-, but the verb refers only to me, so this sequence is unacceptable. You can mix "yo" and "tú", "él", "usted", "ustedes", "vosotros" and "ellos", because "yo" is not in any of those groups, but mix "yo" with "nosotros", "tú" with "voosotros" (o "ustedes"), and things start going wrong.
As a consequence, in a sentence like:
(Ellas) La vieron comprarse unos zapatos.
"Ellas" can never include "her", so you can't assume that her and other women -at the same time- saw her shopping. That "la" must be different from "ellas".
In "¿Quién nos compra los billetes'", we are expecting this "quién" to be someone not included in "nos" (us). If one of us is going to buy it, this person must rephrase the sentence to separate himself (or herself) from this "nos", or avoid clitics (DO and IO) altogether using "para nosotros", which is why I suggested that.
Does it make sense'
OK, I'm completely confused. If you can ask the question like this:
¿Quien nos compra los billetes?
Why can't you respond, "Nos los compré"? The two constructions seem exactly parallel.
lazarus1907 said:
Polyglot1day said:
Lazarus you suggest " nos los compré " I too find the DOP and IOP very confusing !
para nosotros ? nos
That "para nosotros" is not a IO, and it cannot be replaced by one.
>
Quentin said:
Lazarus' reply sounds better (Los compré para nosotros), but what is the grammatical objection to (Nos los compré)? I bought us them.
Heidita said:
Poliglott, "nos los compré" is not correct.
I, too, would like an answer to this question. Although I intuitively find Lazarus's "Los compré (para nosotros)" better, I can't think of a reason why "Nos los compré" is grammatically incorrect.
Le compré un regalo = I bought him a gift
Compré un regalo para él = I bought a gift for him
What is the difference in meaning between these two Spanish sentences, if any? The English versions are virtually identical. What would "Nos los compré" mean, literally'
Lazarus' reply sounds better (Los compré para nosotros), but what is the grammatical objection to (Nos los compré)? I bought us them.
Heidita said:
Poliglott, "nos los compré" is not correct.
>
Polyglot1day said:
Lazarus you suggest " nos los compré " I too find the DOP and IOP very confusing !
para nosotros ? nos
That "para nosotros" is not a IO, and it cannot be replaced by one.
Poliglott, "nos los compré" is not correct.
Los compré para nosotros is what Laza said.
I found some more vocabulary list on this topic.
[url=http://my.spanishdict.com/vocabulary/vocabulary/show'id=1710195%3ATermList%3A1032195]Look at this.[/url]
You will find some more lists to practise on "most recent" made by the same forer.
