Te Insto A Que / Te Pido Que

[Bobbert]

I assume the following sentences are correct since I have seen them written this way:

Te insto a que reconsideres.
Le insto a que tome una decisión.

Te pido que lo pienses.
Le pido que lo acepte.

If the above sentences are written correctly, I don’t understand why “te” and “le” are used before the words “insto” and “pido.” Can the same sentences be correctly written and understood as:

Insto a que (tú) reconsideres.
Insto a que (usted) tome una decisión.

Pido que (tú) lo pienses.
Pido que (usted) lo acepte.

Grammar is not my strong point, so I hope someone who knows grammar can explain why “te” and “le” are written before the verbs and/or if they are necessary before the verbs.

Is there a grammar rule that addresses this?

[aleCcowaN]

Another instance of mixing up Spanish indicative with English indicative.

Sólo te pido que me entiendas (I asking you to do that specific thing: I'm only asking you [to consider my motivations/to put yourself in my shoes])
Sólo pido que me entiendas (I asking that, you should deduct to whom from the end of the phrase: I'm only asking to put yourself in my shoes* )
Sólo pido que entiendas (I asking that blurry "that" and you are somewhat involved in that request).

I would suppose English works exactly the same way:

I'm only asking a little quietness. And I'm only asking from you to stop that rattle you do for a while.

Sólo pido que me endiendan (I'm only expecting that people may understand what moves/ed me)
Sólo te pido que me endiendas (I'm asking that to you and only from you)

Make me know if I'm not conveying in English the notions I think.

Basically, in "te pido que lo pienses", thinking that the person in subjunctive "pienses" indeed modifies indicative "pido" as to make that "te" redundant, is incorrect.

The same, or worse, with "Le insto a que tome una decisión", where the subordinated clause introduced by the conjunction "que" gives no clue about who was "instado" (exhorted) to achieve such result, because the logic says it's the person addressed using "Ud.", but that's not what the sentence says.

[Bobbert]

aleCcowaN,

Thanks for the explanation, but I can’t say that I understand yet. I have read and reread your explanation, and I’m sure it’s helping me to get closer to understanding, but I’m not there yet.

“Sólo te pido que me entiendas (I asking you to do that specific thing: I'm only asking you [to consider my motivations/to put yourself in my shoes])”

Using that reasoning, if I want YOU and only YOU to do a specific thing, am I to assume it is correct to say:

Te quiero que lo hagas.

or is

Quiero que TÚ lo hagas with emphasis on the word TÚ sufficient?

If my first example is incorrect and/or not used, then, No, I’m not understanding at all.

Maybe if you could answer the following, I’ll understand more:

1. Do the verbs that I chose (instar, pedir) have any bearing on whether “te” is necessary? If so, what other verbs should I be aware of? I'll just memorize them.

2. Do you think my confusion is because of a grammar issue or an issue of still not understanding the exact meanings of the sentences that I wrote?

Maybe some other examples of “te” before the verb followed by a subjunctive conjugation will help me understand.

Thank you for any help you or anyone can give me.

[aleCcowaN]

"te quiero que lo hagas" is agramatical because "te quiero" means "I love you" and there's not even the possibility of it meaning "I'd love ..." (me encantaría).

Quiero que lo hagas ---> I want you to do it.
Quiero que tú lo hagas ---> I want YOU to do it / I want you to do it (and not someone else)

but

Te ordeno que lo hagas ---> I command you to do it
Te ordeno que te calles ---> I command your silence
Te ordeno que me prestes tu total atención ---> I command you full attention.

These are more along the lines of what you're asking in the OP.

From command to supplication, any exhort seems to need the by-whom to-whom parts to be clearly marked off. That means a "yes" answer to your question #1 ... but not totally. I would expect everybody to understand what I'm saying about Spanish indicative not being English indicative and Spanish subjunctive not being a capricious way to express certain instances English indicative and else, with "que" being magic word that points something is being "triggered" some place else by who knows what.

To feel how this exhort thing works, a fragment of a song that was a hit when I was eagerly waiting for the time to come when that glorious part of life called teen age would be part of my life (so, prepare to fly 43 years into the past), and everyone knew how to play it in their guitars or at least, to sing the lyrics. It's a tragic rock ballad of a lover who is trying to get being reached by his/her recently lost half through the grave. It's lyrics are a great practice for the grammar bit you're asking about (if you forbid the horrible spelling mistakes of the person hanging the video).

About question #2, I think you are doing what everyone does regarding a foreign language: trying to use the model of you native tongue when there's no clear information available to you. If a problem, it's everyone's, including me, and not solely yours.

Just compare your two languages, the native one to the one you're acquiring: English is extremely dependent on word order ... "boy band" is a band made of boys, and "band boy" y a boy who plays of sings in a band. Made that into "chico banda" and "banda chico" and you get the king of gibberish one only hears as mock Spanish in the recording of a techno-salsa American style. In that short scale, Spanish is dependent on coordination and articulation "buena banda" and "banda buena" -not exactly the same- or "buenas bandas" and "bandas buenas", but don't dare to say "bandas buena" because we'd fall in gibberish territory instantly.

When we take another step away, new structures start to show:

Quiero que vengas ... que vengas quiero

I want you to come ... to come I want you

The notion conveyed in both languages contains two verbs that are in risk of clashing and render the phrases unintelligible (Quiero que vienes* I want you come*) One verb is clearly an action and the other verb is treated as a thing or notion. The trick of English: made it into an infinitive ("to come"). The trick of Spanish: forbid this to be done by indicative and create a whole new mood to deal with these "actions behind a muffler". Spanish invented a whole new conjunction just meaning "hey, here it comes!" stylized as "que", and that brings certain freedom to order your building blocks the way you like.

To make things short(er), when you see a clause introduced by "que" try to get involved deeper in the way Spanish works. Don't try to make it into "yet another instance with magical triggers that one should be aware of" or "another irritating situation that should be dealt as vocabulary" (I'm not saying that you do that, but every English native learning their SSL do it in some degree).

[Bobbert]

Okay. I’m finally getting it now!

Basically, in "te pido que lo pienses", thinking that the person in subjunctive "pienses" indeed modifies indicative "pido" as to make that "te" redundant, is incorrect.

It helps to know that the “te” and “le” in my original examples are not redundant and are used to convey a specific meaning. That makes sense.

Te ordeno que lo hagas ---> I command you to do it
Te ordeno que te calles ---> I command your silence
Te ordeno que me prestes tu total atención ---> I command you full attention.

Your examples make a lot of sense. I can see that my confusion is not a grammar issue; it’s more of an issue of conveying a specific meaning.

By the way, thanks for the link to the song. The music from Argentina is so expressive and I love to hear the Argentine accent. I still listen to Estela Raval’s songs from time to time because she was such a gifted singer, and I understand more and more of her songs as I continue with my Spanish studies.

[aleCcowaN]

Escrito originalmente por Bobbert

By the way, thanks for the link to the song. The music from Argentina is so expressive and I love to hear the Argentine accent. I still listen to Estela Raval’s songs from time to time because she was such a gifted singer, and I understand more and more of her songs as I continue with my Spanish studies.

Did Estela Raval ever sing an Argentine song? and did her do it in a genuine accent?. I had to look it up in Wikipedia and other sources because I mostly know her by name -and certain strident bits that I'm exposed to hear once in a blue moon while walking in the street or doing zapping-. For international songs, I prefer them in their originals: Come Prima (sung by her translated, as "Como antes") and regarding living in the past while hearing Mexican songs, I reject those boringly mellifluous and mono-thematic, like her "Tú eres mi destino", as I bow to intelligent lyrics, like Armando Manzanero's.

Contrary to that, the song I used as an example of exhorts made in Spanish is typically Argentine, and it was considered third among "
Las 100 canciones más destacadas del rock argentino según Rolling Stone y MTV"