# yo lo/le admiro (direct object pronoun)



## veggie21

Hi 
according to my grammar book 'lo' and 'le' can be used as *direct *object pronouns for 'you' (usted) and 'los' and 'les' used for 'you' (ustedes)

i.e. lo admiro - I admire you (usted) and le admiro - I admire you (usted)  are both correct.

However, other grammar sources don't explain this well and use 'lo' only. They use 'le' only as an indirect object pronoun.

Can you please solve this mystery for me, once and for all? Can I use both 'lo' and 'le', 'los' and 'les'? If so, which is more current?

Thank you,
veggie21


----------



## donbill

You'll find a lot of information in the _Diccionario panhispánico de dudas_: http://lema.rae.es/dpd/?key=le

It's a complex subject. You'll find many threads about it in the WR database. Here are a few of them:

leísmo, laísmo (otro hilo) - grammar
LeÍsmo, LoÍsmo - grammar
Leismo, solo hombres? - grammar
leísmo...despertarla/le? - grammar
Leismo..todo el mundo lo entiende - grammar
lo (le?) he lastimado - personal direct object (leísmo)


----------



## veggie21

Thank you donbill
I have looked at the links and my question still remains unanswered.

Can you used 'le' and 'les' as a direct object pronoun to refer to vd. M and vds. M? At the moment I am not interested in indirect object pronouns as I understand these, as do I understand loismo, leismo, laismo.
This is what I need to know. Are these correct?

le ayudo - I am helping you (vd. M)
les ayudo - I am helping you (vds. M)


----------



## Agró

This is called "leísmo de cortesía" and is correct. See this.


----------



## veggie21

Thank you Agró

I have read your link. However, can you tell me, is it also correct to say, 'lo ayudo (vd.)' and 'los ayudo (vds.)?
and, in the example from your link, ¿En qué puedo atender*lo*, señor?

Gracias
veggie21


----------



## Agró

That would be very uncommon in Spain's Spanish, but correct too (it sounds very American to me).


----------



## veggie21

I am still trying to get my head around this.
How about this example: Lo vi. - I saw you (vd.) or Le vi. - I saw you (vd.)

Are they both correct and common in Spain's Spanish?


----------



## Agró

Same as before, the option with "le" is far more common in Spain.


----------



## SevenDays

veggie21 said:


> Hi
> according to my grammar book 'lo' and 'le' can be used as *direct *object pronouns for 'you' (usted) and 'los' and 'les' used for 'you' (ustedes)
> 
> i.e. lo admiro - I admire you (usted) and le admiro - I admire you (usted)  are both correct.
> 
> However, other grammar sources don't explain this well and use 'lo' only. They use 'le' only as an indirect object pronoun.
> 
> Can you please solve this mystery for me, once and for all? Can I use both 'lo' and 'le', 'los' and 'les'? If so, which is more current?
> 
> Thank you,
> veggie21



Direct object pronouns: _lo, la, los, las_
Indirect object pronouns: _le, les_

If you follow that pattern, you'll never be wrong. Beyond that, you get into the controversial area of _*leísmo*_: the use of _le _in place of _lo_. There are two types of _leísmo_. One, where _le_ displaces _lo,_ but only in cases of singular masculine; that's where you get _*le* vi _("I saw *him*") instead of _*lo *vi_. Not to be flip about it, but this type of _leísmo_ is very popular among _leístas_, but frowned upon by _non-leístas_. It comes down to regional usage; in certain areas, this _leísmo_ is quite prevalent (I would imagine certain parts of Spain, including Madrid, but not _all_ of Spain). On the other hand, most of Latin America doesn't use this type of _leísmo_ (but which parts _do_, I really couldn't say). Moreover, (and this is where things get a bit touchy), this _leísmo _is accepted by the _Real Academia Española_, the entity that oversees our language, much to the chagrin and criticism of non-leístas. A subset of this type _leísmo_ is the use of "les" for plural masculine, which is not accepted by RAE, but which is nonetheless found among some_ leístas_ (_*les *vi_ for _*los *vi_, meaning "I saw them," where "them" means "all masculine"). It follows from all this that the use of "le" for "la" or "las" is not accepted (in other words, _le vi_ for _la vi, _meaning "I saw her," is a no-no), though you may still find it in some everyday speech. The second type of _leísmo _is much more common throughout the Spanish speaking world, and not really controversial, and that's the _leismo de cortesía_, found in expressions of "offering help," such as _¿*le* puedo ayudar?_ (in place of _¿*lo* puedo ayudar?_), where "courtesy" is implied. In this use, both forms (with "le" and "lo") co-exist, though I suspect that "lo" is still more prevalent. So, what to do? As I said before, master the use of normative object pronouns, direct and indirect, and you'll be ok; then, be mindful of regional differences (and if you ever find yourself in a _leísta_ area, such as Madrid, you don't _have_ to resort to the first type of _leísmo; _nonetheless, it wouldn't hurt to keep in mind: _while in Rome, do as Romans do _...)


----------



## donbill

Because you've asked specifically about the verb ayudar, I'll refer you again to the _Diccionario panhispánico de dudas:_ http://lema.rae.es/dpd/

Search 'ayudar' and you'll see that the matter is complicated by the fact that the object can be considered direct or indirect.

From the standpoint of historical grammar, _lo_ and _los_ are accusative and _le_ and _les_ are dative. As SevenDays points out, you won't go wrong if you follow that.


----------



## veggie21

If 'Le vi' means I saw you (vd. M), would you also say 'Le vi' (vd. F)
and
I saw him = lo vi or le vi?
This is so confusing. Sorry!


----------



## Peterdg

veggie21 said:


> If 'Le vi' means I saw you (vd. M), would you also say 'Le vi' (vd. F)
> and
> I saw him = lo vi or le vi?


Yes.

Lo/la/le vi a usted. ("le" referring both to a male/female)
Los/las/les vi a ustedes. ("les" refreeing both to males/females).

So, "le" and "les" can be used in this case referring to both male and female persons, and can be used as singular and plural. This is the more common option in Spain.

"Lo", "los", "la" and "las" can also be used to refer to usted(es) and this would be the more common option in e.g. Argentina.


----------



## Pedro Giraldo

SevenDays said:


> Direct object pronouns: _lo, la, los, las_
> Indirect object pronouns: _le, les_
> 
> A subset of this type _leísmo_ is the use of "les" for plural masculine, which is not accepted by RAE, but which is nonetheless found among some_ leístas_ (_*les *vi_ for _*los *vi_, meaning "I saw them," where "them" means "all masculine"). _*It follows from all this that the use of "le" for "la" or "las" is not accepted (in other words, le vi for la vi, meaning "I saw her," is a no-no*_))



I think SevenDays adresses your question in post #9, he seems to have an edge on idiomatic and specific terms used in parts of Spain such as Madrid. Either he lives in Spain, was born there or simply did a thorough research on the subject, regardless, as a native Spanish speaker, my advice is that you take his word for it, since the aspects you're studying here are used mainly in Spain.

So according to that:

If 'Le vi' means I saw you (vd. M), would you also say 'Le vi' (vd. F)

I'd dare to say that the answer is no.

It's ok to be confused about this subject though, practice makes perfect.


----------



## SevenDays

veggie21 said:


> If 'Le vi' means I saw you (vd. M), would you also say 'Le vi' (vd. F)
> and
> I saw him = lo vi or le vi?
> This is so confusing. Sorry!



I think you are making it confusing by asking how _would you say?_ because that inevitably leads you to regional variances (and the answer will depend on whether the responder is from a _leísta_ zone or not). I'll repeat what I said before: as a learner (and beginner) stick to the norm: _lo, los_ for direct objects that are masculine; _la, las_, for direct objects that are feminine; _le, les_, for indirect objects, regardless of gender. Stick to that, _master it,_ and you'll be ok in any context, and, more importantly, you'll be understood in any part of the Spanish speaking world. Then, if you wish, you can begin to assimilate, recognize, and understand the use of _leísmo _(and adopt it, if you want to). There's a caveat in all this. There's also a phenomenon known as "falso leísmo," where "le" alternates with lo/la, depending on the type of verb involved (though this is a concept of much debate, where what is "false leísmo" for some may not be for others). That's sort of advanced Spanish, though (if you want to learn more about it, just google "falso leísmo").  For now, focus on the basics. Even in a _leísta_ area, where they say "le vi" (_I saw him_), they'll understand you if you go with "lo vi."


----------



## Peterdg

Pedro Giraldo said:


> I'd dare to say that the answer is no.


I'm sure the answer is "yes" (as already explained in my previous post).


----------



## veggie21

Hi

please could you just tell me if the following are correct or not.


I see him - le veo

I see her - la veo

I see you (vd. M) - le veo

I see you (vd. F) - le veo

I see them (vds. M) - les veo

I see them (vds. F) - les veo


If these are correct, then I am able to apply some logic to direct object pronouns. I understand the other pronouns but am struggling with him, her and you (vd. and vds.)


Thank you so much!


----------



## Peterdg

SevenDays said:


> they'll understand you if you go with "lo vi."


But only if you explicitly add "a usted", so "lo vi *a usted*". Otherwise, it would most probably be interpreted as "I saw him" and the listener would really have to excercise some mental effort to interpret it as "I saw you".


----------



## Pedro Giraldo

Peterdg here, I'll give you a tip:

The one with a reasonable doubt here is veggie21, and SevenDays, me or anyone else here is simply trying to help out. Notice that we quote in order to clarify an idea, and not to challenge or create a debate, so if you disagree with anything said, come up with an explanation directly related to the subject instead of going against what anyone else said. 

Enjoy!


----------



## Peterdg

veggie21 said:


> please could you just tell me if the following are correct or not.


What do you mean with "correct"?

If you mean "what the RAE accepts as correct" then the following applies:


veggie21 said:


> 1) I see him - le veo *OK*
> 
> 2) I see her - la veo *OK*
> 
> 3) I see you (vd. M) - le veo *OK*
> 
> 4) I see you (vd. F) - le veo *OK*
> 
> 5) I see them (vds. M) - les veo *OK*
> 
> 6) I see them (vds. F) - les veo *OK*


In non-leísta areas, 1) would be considered to be wrong, but it is an accepted use by the RAE.

For 3, 4, 5 and 6, you can also use "lo", "la", "los" and "las" respectively, with the risk that I explained in post #17..

EDIT: Corrected as Sevendays kindly pointed out.


----------



## Peterdg

Pedro Giraldo said:


> The one with a reasonable doubt here is veggie21, and SevenDays, me or anyone else here is simply trying to help out. Notice that we quote in order to clarify an idea, and not to challenge or create a debate, so if you disagree with anything said, come up with an explanation directly related to the subject instead of going against what anyone else said.
> 
> Enjoy!


I'm trying to explain the thing as it is. Sevendays is explaining the thing from his point of view, which is a Latin American point of view. I'm entitled to give the details on how it works in Spain and what the RAE considers as being correct or not, or am I mistaken?

And, where did I say something that is not directly related to the issue being discussed here?


----------



## SevenDays

Peterdg said:


> What do you mean with "correct"?
> 
> If you mean "what the RAE accepts as correct" then the following applies:
> In non-leísta areas, 1) would be considered to be wrong, but it is an accepted use by the RAE.
> 2) Is wrong everywhere.
> 
> For 3, 4, 5 and 6, you can also use "lo", "la", "los" and "las" respectively, with the risk that I explained in post #17..



But Peter, "*la *veo" is precisely "I see her" in _non-leístas_ zones, and what's also actually said among some _leístas_ (because the direct object is feminine). For 3, 4, 5, and 6, the risk that you explain in post #17 also applies the other way around; that is, in non-leístas areas, you'd better add "a usted/a ustedes" for "le vi/les vi," otherwise folks would be left wondering, _¿le vi/les vi ... *qué*?_ because "le/les" is an indirect object pronoun.


----------



## Peterdg

SevenDays said:


> But Peter, "*la *veo" is precisely "I see her" in _non-leístas_ zones, and what's also actually said among some _leístas_ (because the direct object is feminine). For 3, 4, 5, and 6, the risk that you explain in post #17 also applies the other way around; that is, in non-leístas areas, you'd better add "a usted/a ustedes" for "le vi/les vi," otherwise folks would be left wondering, _¿le vi/les vi ... *qué*?_ because "le/les" is an indirect object pronoun.


You are absolutely correct. At the time I pressed "edit", it originally said "*le* veo" and I didn't notice that the poster edited his post (or, I must have been half asleep). I will correct it in my previous post.


----------



## dexterciyo

veggie21 said:


> Hi
> 
> please could you just tell me if the following are correct or not.
> 
> 
> I see him - le veo
> 
> I see her - la veo
> 
> I see you (vd. M) - le veo
> 
> I see you (vd. F) - le veo
> 
> I see them *you all* (vds. M) - les veo
> 
> I see them *you all* (vds. F) - les veo
> 
> 
> If these are correct, then I am able to apply some logic to direct object pronouns. I understand the other pronouns but am struggling with him, her and you (vd. and vds.)
> 
> 
> Thank you so much!



They are all correct and accepted forms. You made a mistake in your English translations, though, as you wrote both "ustedes" as _them_, instead of formal plural _you_.

So to sum this up, and sticking only with this sentence as an example (avoiding other peculiar verbs like "ayudar", already covered above):

- Masculine singular: _lo_ and _le_ (the latter is a case of _leísmo_ which is accepted) - I see him! = ¡Lo veo! / ¡Le veo!
- Masculine plural: _los_ - I see them! = ¡Los veo!
- Feminine singular: _la_ - I see her! = ¡La veo!
- Feminine plural: _las_ - I see them! = ¡Las veo!

All formal variations can take both _lo, los, la, las_ and _le, les_, being the latter group a case of _leísmo de cortesía_, which is accepted.

- Formal "you" masculine singular: _lo_ and _le_ - I see you, gentleman! = ¡Lo veo (a usted), señor! / ¡Le veo (a usted), señor!
- Formal "you" masculine plural: _los_ and _les_ - I see you, gentlemen! = ¡Los veo (a ustedes), señores! / ¡Les veo (a ustedes), señores!
- Formal "you" feminine singular: _la_ and _le_ - I see you, lady! = ¡La veo (a usted), señora! / ¡Le veo (a usted), señora!
- Formal "you" feminine plural: _las_ and _les_ - I see you, ladies! = ¡Las veo (a ustedes), señoras! / ¡Les veo (a ustedes), señoras!

Other cases of _leísmo_, _laísmo_ or _loísmo_ are not regarded as accepted. This means they would not be following the current grammar rules in Spanish. Also notice that the accepted _leísmo_ is not used in every Spanish speaking region, as it might spread in some areas while not in others.


----------



## veggie21

Thank you all for your answers. For me, this is one of the hardest things to grasp about the Spanish language and most grammar books (at least the ones I have) avoid explaining it clearly. 

Les agradezco (a ustedes) - Hope this is correct! (if not, I give up!)


----------



## Pedro Giraldo




----------



## Peterdg

veggie21 said:


> and most grammar books (at least the ones I have) avoid explaining it clearly.


The thing is that they explain only one way of how it is used and, because they believe that if they explain the complete story, people will find it too complicated, they simply omit the complexity . Of course, if you do that, the interested learner will soon detect that reality differs from the simplified theory that he was taught and he will get frustrated.

However, there are good grammars around. For English learners I would certainly recommend the grammar of  "Butt and Benjamin". It's an excellent work. If you are not afraid of very detailed grammatical exposés, then you could go for the "Nueva gramática de la lengua española" of the RAE (but be prepared: it's 4000 pages and it is not always easy; on the other hand, it contains some invaluable information that cannot be found anywhere else (as far as I'm aware of)).


----------



## veggie21

Thank you for the recommendation. I will certainly look into 'Butt and Benjamin'.


----------



## Aviador

dexterciyo said:


> ...
> - Masculine singular: _lo_ and _le_ (the latter is a case of _leísmo_ which is accepted) - I see him! = ¡Lo veo! / ¡Le veo!
> […]
> Also notice that the accepted _leísmo_ is not used in every Spanish speaking region...


And this is an example. Yes, this particular dative _le_ is "accepted" by the Real Academia Española and by most Spanish speakers in Spain as correct, but it is considered at least strange, if not completely anomalous, in the Spanish-speaking Americas.


----------

