Al + infinitive usage

[AngelicaDeAlquezar]

@Fazor: Here are some examples... even an absurd one...

¿Ya llamaste al médico?
Have you already called the doctor?

¡Llamen a una ambulancia!
Call an ambulance!

Llamaré al hotel para hacer la reservación.
I've already called the hotel to make the reservation.

José llamó al perro con un silbato.
José called the dog with a whistle.

Yo llamo "planta" a cualquier flor.
I call any flower a "plant".

Llamo y llamo a mi zapato, pero no quiere venir a mi pie.
I call and call my shoe, but it doesn't want to come to my foot. ;)

[Tomisimo]

The verb is "llamar", the pronominal form is "llamarse". This is not a reflexive form, because I don't "me llamo a mí misma"

Reflexive: me lavo, me peino, me miro (al espejo), me visto... (a mí misma)
Pronominal: me voy, me llamo, me acerco, me duermo, me despierto (no a mí misma)

(For learners of Spanish) To distinguish between reflexive verbs and pronomial verbs, just think who the agent and patient of the verb is (semantically)-- if it's the same person then it's a reflexive verb. The agent would typically be the subject of the sentence and the patient the direct object. So with "me lavo", I am both the agent and the patient (I'm doing the washing and I am being washed). With "me voy", it's a little different in that there is no direct object; there is no patient, so it's not reflexive.

So the distinction between relexive and pronomial verbs is valid. That being said, there is a second definition of "reflexive verbs" (at least in English). In this definition, any verb whose grammatical object is a reflexive pronoun can be considered a reflexive verb. This is a looser definition than above, and encompasses both reflexive and pronomial verbs and puts them into one group called reflexive verbs. With "me lavo" you can see that "me" is a reflexive pronoun and is the grammatical object (but not the direct object) of the verb form. Thus under this second definition, it is also a reflexive verb. In any case, for English-speaking people learning Spanish, there isn't much need to keep these two classes of verbs separate since they work the same way. So even if you want to keep the distinction between pronomial and reflexive verbs, it is useful for simplicity's sake to lump them together for the purposes of learning how to conjugate and use them.

[Tomisimo]

It's the verb what provides the "personal" treatment. "Llamar" gives the idea of "someone", even if you're calling the dog. "Llamé al perro". ;)

@Fazor: Here are some examples... even an absurd one...

¿Ya llamaste al médico?
Have you already called the doctor?

¡Llamen a una ambulancia!
Call an ambulance!

Llamaré al hotel para hacer la reservación.
I've already called the hotel to make the reservation.

José llamó al perro con un silbato.
José called the dog with a whistle.

Yo llamo "planta" a cualquier flor.
I call any flower a "plant".

Llamo y llamo a mi zapato, pero no quiere venir a mi pie.
I call and call my shoe, but it doesn't want to come to my foot. ;)

So, to distill the rule here, whenever "llamar" is followed by a direct object, that direct object needs an "a" before it. ¿right? :)

[Fazor]

Isn't 'Me llamo Whatever' directly translated as "I call myself Whatever" ?

And isn't it reflexive whenever a verb acts upon the same object that is doing said verb?

EDIT: Ooops. Tomisimo and Angelica's posts were hiding on a second page, and I did not see them before posting this. Disregard, as the question's been answered already. Gracias. :)

[irmamar]

No sé que tú tenga una pregunta, o si tú no tiene un:) JEJE

"Me llamo Rey Irmamar" ---- Llamarse usó aquí

Bueno, en todo caso "reina":) Y sería "Soy la reina Irmamar", no diría "me llamo la reina..." Pero bueno, de reina nada..., más bien "currante" y ya está :D

[Tomisimo]

Isn't 'Me llamo Whatever' directly translated as "I call myself Whatever" ?

And isn't it reflexive whenever a verb acts upon the same object that is doing said verb?

EDIT: Ooops. Tomisimo and Angelica's posts were hiding on a second page, and I did not see them before posting this. Disregard, as the question's been answered already. Gracias. :)
Yes, I explain this in my post above (#22). If you want to distinguish between reflexive and pronomial verbs, then this one is pronomial, since the agent and patient (usually the grammatical subject and direct object) is not the same. In "me llamo X", you are the agent (subject), but you are not the direct object (you're an indirect object). But under the second definition I gave, this can be considered a reflexive verb, since it uses a reflexive pronoun that is the grammatical object of the verb, even though it's not a direct object. I hope this makes sense. I can keep explaining if it doesn't. :)

[irmamar]

Isn't 'Me llamo Whatever' directly translated as "I call myself Whatever" ?

And isn't it reflexive whenever a verb acts upon the same object that is doing said verb?

You can't translate "me llamo" into "I call myself", because I never call myself. That's the difference between reflexive and pronominal verbs. It's more logical in English: "my name is...". I can say "mi nombre es..." in Spanish, but we use "me llamo..." instead of the other option.

[Fazor]

@Fazor: Here are some examples... even an absurd one...

. . .

Llamo y llamo a mi zapato, pero no quiere venir a mi pie.
I call and call my shoe, but it doesn't want to come to my foot. ;)

:) ¡Gracias! Y, tengo un sentido del humor para cosas que no tener sentido. Creo es porque veo demasiado dibujos animados. ;)

[Fazor]

Yes, I explain this in my post above (#22).

Sí, no veía cuando escribía mis mensaje. Gracias.

I had failed to notice that the last post I was reading was only the last post on that particular page, and that there was another page following it. I do that all too often. :)

[AngelicaDeAlquezar]

So, to distill the rule here, whenever "llamar" is followed by a direct object, that direct object needs an "a" before it. ¿right? :)

Thank you, David, that's what I meant, yes. :)


@Fazor: It's always nice to find someone with that sense of humour. ;)