# ir cogidos de la mano



## mipaz

Hola a Todos,

ir cogidos de la mano was translated as 'to go hand in hand' or to go along holding hands'.  Could someone please explain why the 'ido' form of coger was used in the expression 'hand in hand'.

Gracias por tu respuesta,

mipaz

(after posting I gave this expression more thought.....and I now realize that 'cogidos de la mano' can be translated as 'held by the hand'...and therefore the translation of 'ir cogidos de la mano' makes sense)


----------



## Quique Alfaro

Hola: 

_held by the hand_


----------



## Agró

Because the Spanish expression consists of "ir" + participle of "coger" (cogido, -a, -os, -as)
Vamos cogidos de la mano: We went hand in hand


----------



## vodkawithtomatojuice

Cógeme de la mano o dame la mano: Hold my hand!
Andar (por la calle) cogidos de la mano: To walk (by the street) hand in hand.

Dos cosas que van de la mano o suelen ir juntas, también se dice "hand in hand". Ej: Milk and sugar go hand in hand (or go together). 

Como decía la canción: "love and marriage (bis), they go together like a horse and carriage". 

Nota: "give/lend me a hand" es échame una mano, ayúdame.

Saludos.


----------



## levmac

vodkawithtomatojuice said:


> Cógeme de la mano o dame la mano: Hold *(or take)* my hand!
> Andar (por la calle) cogidos de la mano: *To walk hand in hand through the streets*.
> 
> Dos cosas que van de la mano o suelen ir juntas, también se dice "hand in hand". Ej: Milk and sugar go hand in hand (or go together). *It sounds more normal to me to say "*X* goes hand in hand with *Y*". "*Reading *goes hand in hand with *education and rehabilitation."**



My additions.


----------



## k-in-sc

Andar (por la calle) cogidos de la mano: *To walk down/along the street holding hands*


----------



## gengo

Just to confirm:  This can be used everywhere, right?  Even places where the verb coger is avoided because it has a separate meaning?  Or are there places where they say agarrados or the like?


----------



## k-in-sc

Cogidos de la mano 
You can just say "de la mano" on this side of the pond ...


----------



## ukimix

_Cogidos de la mano_ is idiomatic in my town. No ambiguities in regard to _coger_.  The expression also reminds me of that song of Silvio Rodríguez: _Aunque no esté de moda_.


----------



## gengo

k-in-sc said:


> Cogidos de la mano
> You can just say "de la mano" on this side of the pond ...



Well, I asked because Quique Alfaro is from Argentina, so I wanted to double check.


----------



## gengo

ukimix said:


> _Cogidos de la mano_ is idiomatic in my town. No ambiguities in regard to _coger_.



Good to know.

Any Mexicans?


----------



## robjh22

> Any Mexicans?



Not I, but I do talk to them every day.



> Or are there places where they say agarrados or the like?



Sí, en Mexico, donde dicen: "Los ví agarrados de la mano."


----------



## S.V.

I agree. _Agarrados de la mano. ¡Agarra mi mano!_ As well as _tomados, tomar_, or just "_de la mano_", as K-in-sc points out:_ Van de la mano, Venían de la mano_.

_Cógeme la mano_ could be, err, something different... Though it would be understood.


----------



## ukimix

S.V. said:


> I agree. _Agarrados de la mano. ¡Agarra mi mano!_ As well as _tomados, tomar_, or just "_de la mano_", as K-in-sc points out:_ Van de la mano, Venían de la mano_.
> 
> _Cógeme la mano_ could be, err, something different... Though it would be understood.




Hi S.V.

We use all those expressions too. About _cógeme la mano_, it's different than _cógeme *de *la mano_, which is the usual expression here for the topic. In English it would be the difference between _take my hand _and _hold my hand_: 

_coge mi mano y léela
cógeme *de *la mano y caminemos. _


----------



## incaprincess

I want to express myself freely on this subject. No offense to anyone, but it absolutely bothers me when people use the word 'coger' as in 'to have sexual relations'.  The word 'coger' means to take a hold of.   Over time, the word 'coger' has become adulterated and now, in some cultures, it means to have sexual relations.  Unfortunately, because of that, the word 'agarrar' has replaced 'coger'.  But 'agarrar' means to grab, to yank.  So to me, if two people 'van agarrados de la mano', yes, many people understand it to mean that they are holding hands but technically it's not correct to say that. 

But, because in some cultures, the word 'coger' is now a vulgar expression, we have been obligated to lower our speech standards and use replacement words that really don't even mean that. 

Here in Central America, the word 'coger' could mean to have sexual relations.  But personally, I use it when I want to use the word 'take' or 'take a hold of'.  If anyone who is 'mal pensado' wants to take it the wrong way, they are free to interpret it however they wish. They should know better.


----------



## ukimix

There are several Spanish verbs for the act of holding someone's hand, as S.V, post showed: _tomarse de la mano, cogerse de la mano, ir agarrados de la mano, ir de la mano..._ Here, _coger _is very well understood in the sense that there is no ambiguity about what it means. (We use _tirar _as slang for to have sex.) But my impression is that, most of the time, the context makes clear enough what you are meaning with what you say (it happens with _tirar, coger,_ etc). So maybe what you dislike is the double meaning.


----------



## incaprincess

ukimix said:


> There are several Spanish verbs for the act of holding someone's hand, as S.V, post showed: _tomarse de la mano, cogerse de la mano, ir agarrados de la mano, ir de la mano..._ Here, _coger _is very well understood in the sense that there is no ambiguity about what it means. (We use _tirar _as slang for to have sex.) But my impression is that, most of the time, the context clears enough what you are meaning with what you say (it happens with _tirar, coger,_ etc). So maybe what you dislike is the double meaning.



What I dislike is the double meaning. Yes. But I especially dislike the fact that  'coger' has that double meaning, because I have to use 'coger' so many times during the day and I'd just like to be able to use it without  any ambiguity.  Context should clarify it but there are always people who feel the need to reiterate that it means something sexual. Maybe if they just _listen_ to what I'm saying, they'd discard any possibility of it being sexual. (eye roll) 

 (LOL, yes, I'm familiar with 'tirar'... they use it in Ecuador too.  My cousins explained to me the meaning of that and I was like 'Ooooh, okkkaaaay'. So now I know. )


----------



## S.V.

What you're saying is true, Ukimix (!). I was doing the same as in #4, considering them to be synonyms. I think that is because they're not two different terms, as in English. For instance, if two people are already walking, one could say _toma/agarra mi mano_, and it would be understood that_ you are not to let go_, to stay "_de la mano_". I'm not sure it would be the same in English. 

One of them refers just to the action of _taking some else's hand_, but that _is_ what we first have to do when we hold someone's hand. The context would clear up whether it means one or the other; whether _agarrar_/_tomar_ means "_take it and see it_", "_take it and then let go of it_", "_take it and don't let go_".

*P.S.* Regarding what Princess says, I'd have to add "_Cógeme de la mano_" would probably only make it worse, as if to mean "_Cógeme_*,* _de la mano_". It is not so much that there can be a 'double entendre', but rather the vulgar meaning it _could_ have contaminates the word's usage, and it becomes something we have to avoid.


----------



## gengo

S.V. said:


> For instance, if two people are already walking, one could say _toma/agarra mi mano_, and it would be understood that_ you are not to let go_, to stay "_de la mano_". I'm not sure it would be the same in English.



That meaning is expressed by "to hold *on to* [my] hand" in English.

Ex.
_He took her hand as they looked into each other's eyes.  Then they held hands as they walked home.  When a dog started chasing them, he told her to hold on to his hand and run._

To Incaprincess:  I can understand your feeling about how perfectly good words are given new meaning, but there is no point in fighting it.  That is how language works.  In American English, "pussy" used to mean a cat, and nothing more.  Now, it is impossible to call a cat a pussy without raising eyebrows.  We could lament such changes, but it would be of no use.  Languages are living things and will evolve as they see fit, regardless of how we want them to be.


----------



## k-in-sc

If you use "coger" like they do in Spain, regardless of the fact that you're not in Spain and you're not Spanish, you're making a statement that people around you could interpret in various ways, many of them negative.


----------



## incaprincess

k-in-sc said:


> If you use "coger" like they do in Spain, regardless of the fact that you're not in Spain and you're not Spanish, you're making a statement that people around you could interpret in various ways, many of them negative.



Yes you are right. In reality, I've noticed that mostly Mexicans and some Central Americans use the 'adulterated' form of coger. Most South Americans and practically all Spaniards use 'coger' the way they're supposed to.  Still, I use 'coger' when I need to, and I don't mind giving anyone an explanation if I have to. I grew up hearing the word 'coger' used in the right form, and even when I'm in an environment where 'coger' is adulterated, I still use the word in the right way. Same works for the word 'tirar'.


----------



## Rubns

With the globalisation, in my opinion, nobody is going to look at you funny if you use "coger" the way we Spaniards or some South Americans do. I think many people are aware of these differences and they're used to hearing natives saying "coger" all the time. I wouldn't avoid it if you learnt it that way. A completely different thing would be using it in newspapers, magazines, books etc. aimed at Spanish-speaking people who use "coger" as a synonym of "follar". 

To me "ir cogidos de la mano" is completely natural, the same goes for "ir agarrados de la mano".


----------



## S.V.

gengo said:


> _He took her hand as they looked into each other's eyes.  Then they held hands as they walked home.  When a dog started chasing them, he told her to hold on to his hand and run._


A mother and her son are going to cross a street, she then says "_agarra mi mano_" [Or "_agárrame de la mano_"].
A couple are walking down the street. She recognizes some of her friends, just a few feet away, and then whispers to him "_toma mi mano_".​
In both cases, you would have used "_hold my hand_", right? 

 Or for instance, in the scene where Sam tells Frodo to _take his hand_1, when he's on the edge of the cliff, could he have also said "_Hold my hand_!". In Spanish, at least where I live, "_¡Agárrame de la mano!_" would also work.


----------



## gengo

S.V. said:


> A mother and her son are going to cross a street, she then says "_agarra mi mano_" [Or "_agárrame de la mano_"].
> A couple are walking down the street. She recognizes some of her friends, just a few feet away, and then whispers to him "_toma mi mano_".​
> In both cases, you would have used "_hold my hand_", right?



No, I would use hold in the first, and take in the second.  But hold is not incorrect in the second.  Take stresses the action of putting one hand in the other, while hold stresses the state of the hands being together.  So in many situations either one can be used.


----------



## S.V.

Por lo menos la forma adjetiva no presenta problemas. De ese tipo, eso es.

Para "_de la mano_", el CORDE da un ejemplo de 1905; «_Amor y misticismo van de la mano en el espíritu del hombre_». De Pérez Galdós. Seguramente la necesidad de tener una expresión equivalente en extensión a la inglesa _hand in hand_ tiene algo que ver con que sea más común por estas partes.


----------



## gengo

S.V. said:


> Seguramente la necesidad de tener una expresión equivalente en extensión a la inglesa _hand in hand_ tiene algo que ver con que sea más común por estas partes.



As an aside, here is something you may find funny (or sad).  The Spanish phrase _mano a mano_ has entered the English lexicon, and is often heard on TV and in movies, as well as on the street.  However, most speakers seem to think it means "man to man," probably because that sounds very similar to the Spanish.  They are often surprised to learn that it means "hand to hand."

Here is an example of this usage.

-He and I are having a disagreement, and aren't getting along.
-You guys need to sit down and talk, mano a mano.


----------



## Quique Alfaro

Rubns said:


> With the globalisation, in my opinion, nobody is going to look at you funny if you use "coger" the way we Spaniards or some South Americans do.



Hola:

Evitá usar _coger_ en Argentina. y _recoger_, ya que estamos, usalo para cosas pero no para personas.

Sí te van a mirar raro... o vas a oír muchas risitas... y hasta es posible que alguien se ofenda.



Saludos.


----------



## Rubns

He estado en Argentina y nadie me ha dicho nada por usar "coger" o "recoger", sabían que era español y que aquí se usa así. Por supuesto me han dicho que no lo diga, pero en ningún momento nadie se ha reído de mí por eso y por supuesto nadie se ofendió.

Un saludo.


----------



## Keahi

Hola Gengo.
Creo que en inglés la expresión "mano a mano" (lo digo  por ejemplo que has puesto), no significa ir juntos, de la mano o  cogidos de la mano, sino que la han tomado del castellano "mano a mano" que  significa Realizar un desafio, reto o enfrentamiento entre dos  personas.
Tener un mano a mano = face to face.
Entiendo por eso,  que en inglés algunos lo tomen como "man to man" porque en es un desafío  entre 2, en el ejército por ejemplo se dice "cuerpo a cuerpo" pero creo  que es injusto con las chicas, porque ellas también pueden tener un  "mano a mano".
Pero ahora tengo una curiosidad. Es diferente "hand to hand" a "hand in hand" ¿verdad?
En  cuanto a la palabra "coger", particularmente no uso mucho esta palabra,  pero si estoy en Argentina, malinterpretarían si digo: "_fueron cogidos con la manos en la masa_"?
En  Perú, coger se usa con el sentido de "hacer sexo" a otra persona pero  no es frecuente, es más común como sinónimo de "Tomar", 
"_El novió la cogió en brazos_..." y casi siempre en tiempo pasado.
Pregunto, ¿Tan malsonante es en algunos lugares para estigmatizarla?
¿en inglés pasa lo mismo con "screw" por ejemplo?
En cuanto a la pregunta inicial, Agró la ha respondido en el mensaje 3.
Por otra parte, en Perú se dice "Ellos van de la mano" se omite lo demás.
Un saludo.


----------



## k-in-sc

Rubns said:


> He estado en Argentina y nadie me ha dicho nada por usar "coger" o "recoger", sabían que era español y que aquí se usa así. Por supuesto me han dicho que no lo diga, pero en ningún momento nadie se ha reído de mí por eso y por supuesto nadie se ofendió.


Not to your face, but there are a lot of jokes about the Spanish way of talking. The one about the cats comes to mind ...


----------

