Confusing personal pronouns

[Perikles]

This is in the grammar section, because I (hopefully) don't need a translation. I'm just bothered about who is doing what and where: (a couple of paragraphs later that becomes blindingly obvious, but that's not the point :D):


La acompañó a su casa. Ya en la puerta, y en vista de que era casi medianoche y no había nadie en la casa, la convenció de que lo invitara a un brandy mientras veían los álbumes de recortes y fotografias de más de diez años de acontecimientos públicos .......(Márquez again)

I understand this as:

he accompanied her to her house .... he convinced her to invite him in for a brandy while they look at ...

Now I know this is the way to understand it, because the sentence finishes with ...que ella decía tener. So they must be at her house. But could it not also be understood, (until the end bit), as

he accompanied her to his house .... he convinced her that he should invite her in for a brandy while they look at ...

If that reading were not possible, how would the sentence differ? Thanks. :thinking:

[chileno]

This is in the grammar section, because I (hopefully) don't need a translation. I'm just bothered about who is doing what and where: (a couple of paragraphs later that becomes blindingly obvious, but that's not the point :D):


I understand this as:

he accompanied her to her house .... he convinced her to invite him in for a brandy while they look at ...

Now I know this is the way to understand it, because the sentence finishes with ...que ella decía tener. So they must be at her house. But could it not also be understood, (until the end bit), as

he accompanied her to his house .... he convinced her that he should invite her in for a brandy while they look at ...

If that reading were not possible, how would the sentence differ? Thanks. :thinking:


La acompañó a su casa.

Cannot be his house, because then it would change to "they both went to his house." You cannot accompany somebody to your house! :)

Think about the second one... it is also obvious even in English, for the same reason

[Perikles]

Cannot be his house, because then it would change to "they both went to his house." You cannot accompany somebody to your house! I'm not sure whether that would sound odd or not. Then how would it be in Spanish? :thinking:

[chileno]

I'm not sure whether that would sound odd or not. Then how would it be in Spanish? :thinking:


hmmm


I accompany you to my house.:bad: you and I/we went to my house.:good:


he accompany her to his house. :bad: She and he went to his house.:good:

Right?

[aleCcowaN]

he accompanied her to his house .... he convinced her that he should invite her in for a brandy while they look at ...

La llevó a su casa ... la convenció de que él (habría de invitarle/le invitaría) un coñac mientras miraban ... (I can't extract any Spanish-like subjunctive from that "should")

[poli]

Es verdad que los pronombres en español me llevan al huerto. Hay veces que me enreden tanto analizando la gramática de la frase que pierdo el significado de lo que está escrito.:mad:

[AngelicaDeAlquezar]

@Perikles: If it had been his house, as Chileno and Alec say, he would have said "la llevó a su casa". And he wouldn't have had to convince her to invite him in for a drink, as he would have been the one who would have offered it: "Le invitó un brandy". :)

(Márquez is not prone to amphibologies:p, unless they're needed.) ;)

[Perikles]

Then how would it be in Spanish? :thinking:

She and he went to his house.:good:Right?Hmmm. Baffling answer. Thanks anyway. :D

@Perikles: If it had been his house, as Chileno and Alec say, he would have said "la llevó a su casa". Ah - OK, thanks everyone - I see a difference. :thumbsup::thumbsup:
(Márquez is not prone to amphibologies:p, :banghead: :lol::lol::lol:

[Luna Azul]

La acompañó a su casa. Ya en la puerta, y en vista de que era casi medianoche y no había nadie en la casa, la convenció de que lo invitara a un brandy mientras veían los álbumes de recortes y fotografias de más de diez años de acontecimientos públicos .......(Márquez again)

I understand this as:

he accompanied her to her house ....:good::thumbsup: he convinced her to invite him in for a brandy while they look at ...:good::thumbsup:To me, it is obvious that he accompanied her to her house.. if it weren't her house García Márquez wouldn't use the verb "acompañar" but "llevar" or maybe "invitar".

It does say that he convinced her to invite him in to have a glass of brandy. I don't think that can be understood any other way because of the way the pronouns are used, and I don't see how she could invite him to have a drink if they were at his house.. It wouldn't make any sense.

They are at her house, of course, and they are going to drink her brandy while....

:)

[Perikles]

OK - thanks. Different verb needed. That su still remains irritatingly unspecific for me though, when I'm used to a his/her or sein/ihr. :mad: :thumbsup:

[chileno]

OK - thanks. Different verb needed. That su still remains irritatingly unspecific for me though, when I'm used to a his/her or sein/ihr. :mad: :thumbsup:

There is no doubt about that.

A joke in Spanish to illustrate some more.

Un jefe sospecha que uno de sus empleados pudiera estar robando dinero de la empresa, y decide contratar a un detective privado. Al cabo de una semana, el detective se presenta a dar su primet reporte y dice:

- Señor, el tipo parece estar limpio, aunque la única actividad sospechosa es a la hora de almuerzo. El tipo sale de la oficina alrededor de las 12pm, se va a su casa, tiene relaciones amorosas apasionadamente con su señora, después se fuma uno de sus habanos, se viste y se viene a la oficina.

- ¡Entonces no me está robando!

- ¡Señor, usted no me está entendiendo! ¿Lo puedo tutear?

- Claro, contesta muy contento porque el empleado en cuestión no le estaba robando.

- El tipo sale de la oficina alrededor de las 12pm, se va a su casa, tiene relaciones amorosas apasionadamente con su señora, después se fuma uno de sus habanos, se viste y se viene a la oficina.

:thinking: :D

[Perikles]

:lol::lol::lol: Except the punch line makes no sense without tu/tus

[Luna Azul]

OK - thanks. Different verb needed. That su still remains irritatingly unspecific for me though, when I'm used to a his/her or sein/ihr. :mad: :thumbsup:

I can understand that. In the spoken language we use "su" for the 3rd person very seldom, if ever.

We usually say "la casa de él/ella/ellos/ellas.

In the second person (usted or ustedes) we do use "su", but if we notice there might be any confusion, we say "la casa de usted/ustedes".

Unfortunately, that's not something that happens very frequently in the written language :o

- El tipo sale de la oficina alrededor de las 12pm, se va a tu casa, tiene relaciones amorosas apasionadamente con tu señora, después se fuma uno de tus habanos, se viste y se viene a la oficina.

This is what you meant dear Chileno, right?:D

:)

[chileno]

:lol::lol::lol: Except the punch line makes no sense without tu/tus

Ah! you caught it! :)

:D