Help with use of se ve

[elchocoano]

I'm seeing this usage of "se ve" often. Here is an example that I noticed today in semana.com.

"En el clip, que dura al menos 2 minutos, se ve a una mujer joven, ..."

I can't understand the usage of "se ve" here. I though that "se ve" was a passive reflexive usage. So I translate this as "a young woman is seen." But if a young woman is the subject of verse, then why is there the preposition a? Wouldn't that only be used if a yound woman was the object of the verb?

It is as if the meaning is "one sees a young woman," which would them make a young woman the object.

Help!

[Rusty]

It can be translated as 'one sees' or 'they see' (using the accepted conversion from 'one' to 'they' singular) 'a young woman'. The woman is the object, as you surmised.

There are many uses of the pronoun 'se', all of which are explained in other threads. The sentence you posted is an impersonal sentence (no subject). You can read more about impersonal sentences here or here.

[elchocoano]

Thanks. Yes, I now remember those two previous discussions.

I have to admit that I don't really understand this area very well. But the main thing that I wanted to be certain of in my example was that the "personal a" was correct. So it seems to be an impersonal sentence using a pronominal verb and having a direct object.

[wrholt]

Escrito originalmente por elchocoano

Thanks. Yes, I now remember those two previous discussions.

I have to admit that I don't really understand this area very well. But the main thing that I wanted to be certain of in my example was that the "personal a" was correct. So it seems to be an impersonal sentence using a pronominal verb and having a direct object.

Yes, the 'personal a' here is correct. When the direct object is a known or identifiable person or personified thing using 'personal a' is generally required.

[elchocoano]

Today I read this in elcolombiano.com regarding prohibited campaigning on the metro in Medellín.


"Al candidato Federico Gutiérrez se le vio en el metro de Medellín, de jeans y camisa blanca, haciendo proselitismo."


In English: "Candidate F.G. was seen on the Medellín metro, in jeans and white shirt, campaigning."



This use of "se ve" seems to be exactly the same as in my original question, except that the direct object of the action (ver) is brought to the front, thus demanding the use of a personal pronoun later. But I would expect that we should see "lo", not "le", since we have a personal direct object.



That is, I would expect the sentence to be:
"Al candidato Federico Gutiérrez se lo vio en el metro de Medellín, de jeans y camisa blanca, haciendo proselitismo."


I therefore believe that this sentence has a grammatical error. Can anyone verify this?

[Rusty]

This is a case of leísmo, often used (and accepted as proper grammar when the direct object is a male) in Spain.

[elchocoano]

But this is taken from a Colombian newspaper, so I doubt that it is leísmo.

[Rusty]

I've seen and heard leísmo used in many places besides Spain. This is such a case.

[elchocoano]

Thanks.

[elchocoano]

I just found this online:
http://www.hispanoteca.eu/Foro/ARCHI...%20lo%20ve.htm

It looks like this issue of lo/le and also the issue of passive se versus impersonal se is rather confusing. I'm going to have to carefully go through this article.