verse with the intensifying indirect object pronoun

[Nfqufktc]

¡Hola!

I would appreciate it if you could comment on my analysis of the following samples.


Desde aquí se ve el mar.
You can see the sea from here.
[IMPERSONAL: One/people can see the sea from here.]
El mar is a direct object.
Se ve is reflexive verb verse in agreement with the implied subject la gente.
Would you agree that el mar is the direct object?

¿Se me ve algo?
Is my underwear showing through?
Algo is a subject (inanimate/indefinite)
Is something being revealed / shown for me to be ashamed of?
It is NOT IMPERSONAL.
Me is an intensifying (person affected/person responsible) indirect object pronoun.
Me means a person indirectly affected by the action of her underwear’s showing.

Por lo que se ve
Apparently
[IMPERSONAL: Because of / from what one can see]
Lo que is a object relative pronoun that refers to an abstract idea.
Se ve is reflexive verb verse in agreement with the implied subject la gente.

1. (Tú) Te ves preciosa en esa foto.
You look (seem) beautiful in that picture. It is NOT IMPERSONAL. The subject is tú.
Preciosa is an adjective complement.
Te ves is reflexive verb verse in agreement with the implied subject tú.

2. Se te ve más joven.
It is an IMPERSONAL sentence.
The implied subject is an animate being (uno, gente)
IT IS NOT a construction with the intensifying indirect object pronoun because this construction is used with INANIMATE SUBJECTS.
te is a direct object pronoun.
One believes (whom?) you to look younger.
Everybody believes that you look younger.
You are seen by people to look like a younger person.

Would you confirm that te is a direct object pronoun?

3. Súbete los texanos que se te ven los calzonzillos.
Pull up your jeans because you can see your shorts.
(your shorts are shown/seen for you to be ashamed)
It is NOT IMPERSONAL.
Los calzonzillos is a subject.
Te is an intensifying (person affected/person responsible) indirect object pronoun.
Te means a person indirectly affected by the action of his boxers’ showing.
Se ven is a reflexive verb verse in agreement with los calzonzillos.
Would you agree that los calzonzillos is the subject?

Súbete los texanos que se le ven los calzonzillos.
Pull up your jeans because one/people can see your shorts.
Súbete los texanos que se les ven los calzonzillos.
Pull up your jeans because they/ you (2pers,pl,formal) can see your shorts.
Would it be ok to modify the sentence like that?

Thank you.

[AngelicaDeAlquezar]

Originally Posted by Nfqufktc

Desde aquí se ve el mar.
You can see the sea from here.
[IMPERSONAL: One/people can see the sea from here.]
El mar is a direct object.
Se ve is reflexive verb verse in agreement with the implied subject la gente.
Would you agree that el mar is the direct object?

Yes, "el mar" is the DO.
"Se" is not a reflexive particle, but just the sign of the impersonal.

Originally Posted by Nfqufktc

¿Se me ve algo?
Is my underwear showing through?
Algo is a subject (inanimate/indefinite)
Is something being revealed / shown for me to be ashamed of?
It is NOT IMPERSONAL.
Me is an intensifying (person affected/person responsible) indirect object pronoun.
Me means a person indirectly affected by the action of her underwear’s showing.

No, this is an impersonal sentence.
"Se", here, is an indicator of an impersonal sentence. It is not a reflexive pronoun.
The verb is "ver", and there is no subject that sees.
What can be seen is the direct object, and this is "algo".
The person affected by the thing that is showing, is me, so "me" is the indirect object.


I'll come back later with the rest of your sentences. I need to read more about this to write clearer explanations.

[Nfqufktc]

Thank you, AngelicaDeAlquezar. I am looking forward to hearing your other explanations.

[AngelicaDeAlquezar]

Originally Posted by Nfqufktc

Por lo que se ve
Apparently
[IMPERSONAL: Because of / from what one can see]
Lo que is a object relative pronoun that refers to an abstract idea.
Se ve is reflexive verb verse in agreement with the implied subject la gente.

Definitely an impersonal.
"Se" is not a reflexive, because there is no subject doing the action. If the subject were "la gente", the "se" wouldn't be necessary. We would simply say: "por lo que (la gente) ve".

Originally Posted by Nfqufktc

1. (Tú) Te ves preciosa en esa foto.
You look (seem) beautiful in that picture. It is NOT IMPERSONAL. The subject is tú.
Preciosa is an adjective complement.
Te ves is reflexive verb verse in agreement with the implied subject tú.

You are right that this is not an impersonal sentence.
However, I have a problem calling this construction a reflexive. This is a specific use of the verb "ver" in a "more general" pronominal form with a dedicated entry in the dictionary, where "verse" means "to have a certain appearance".
I've been trying to figure out how to explain better that not all pronominals seem to me reflexives, but since this seems to be mostly a Latin American usage, I couldn't find any specific explanation to it. To me, this is not a reflexive, because the person doesn't see herself as beautiful; it's my perception of her as a speaker what is being expressed.

Originally Posted by Nfqufktc

2. Se te ve más joven.
It is an IMPERSONAL sentence.
The implied subject is an animate being (uno, gente)
IT IS NOT a construction with the intensifying indirect object pronoun because this construction is used with INANIMATE SUBJECTS.
te is a direct object pronoun.
One believes (whom?) you to look younger.
Everybody believes that you look younger.
You are seen by people to look like a younger person.

Would you confirm that te is a direct object pronoun?

I have a little problem with trying to find an implicit subject in an impersonal sentence, because this is exactly what is missing. This is why the verb is conjugated in the third person singular and we add "se" as the pronoun.
Anyway, you are not wrong to say that this sentence is clearly pointing out the perception of a third person on the one looking younger.
As for the direct object... You are right that this is by no means an indirect object.
And although it is true that "ver" usually needs a thing/person that is being seen, in these constructions ("te ves bien", "se te ve más joven"), where it's the appearance of the person what is being expressed, I have trouble placing what exact function the pronoun "te" is doing. Let's not label it for now, I'll keep looking for an answer, but keep in mind that you use "verse" and not "ver", when it refers to the appearance of someone/something.

- Las cosas no se ven bien.
Things don't look good.
- La comida se ve muy buena.
The food looks really good.
- Juan se ve mejor después de la cirugía.
Juan looks better after the surgery.
- Los jardines se ven muy bonitos.
The gardens look so pretty.
- Te ves muy triste.
You look very sad.
- Creo que hoy nos vemos bastante cansados.
I think we look rather tired today.

Originally Posted by Nfqufktc

3. Súbete los texanos que se te ven los calzoncillos.
Pull up your jeans because you can see your shorts. -> Here, the translation is rather "...because one/people/anyone can see your shorts".
(your shorts are shown/seen for you to be ashamed)
It is NOT IMPERSONAL.
Los calzoncillos is a subject.
Te is an intensifying (person affected/person responsible) indirect object pronoun.
Te means a person indirectly affected by the action of his boxers’ showing.
Se ven is a reflexive verb verse in agreement with los calzoncillos.
Would you agree that los calzoncillos is the subject?

"Se" is showing that there is no specific subject who sees the shorts, so it is an impersonal construction.
"Te" is an indirect object pronoun here.
And it's the same case as "se ve el mar", so "los calzoncillos" are the direct object.

Originally Posted by Nfqufktc

Súbete los texanos que se le ven los calzoncillos.
Pull up your jeans because one/people can see your shorts.
Súbete los texanos que se les ven los calzoncillos.
Pull up your jeans because they/ you (2pers,pl,formal) can see your shorts.
Would it be ok to modify the sentence like that?

No, when you change "te" for "le"/"les", you are doing the same as "háblele con el gerente". There is a lack of agreement between the person in the sentence and the pronoun, so your listener has to look for a third person involved.
- Súbete los texanos que se le/les ven los calzoncillos
-> Pull up your jeans because his/their shorts are showing.
It doesn't make sense that you pull up your jeans, since the other peple's shorts will still be showing.

- Súbete los pantalones que (ellos) te ven los calzoncillos.
Pull up your jeans because they can see your shorts.
- Súbete los pantalones que (él) te ve los calzoncillos.
Pull up your jeans because he can see your shorts.
- Súbete los pantalones que (yo) te veo los calzoncillos.
Pull up your jeans because I can see your shorts.
- Súbete los pantalones que (nosotros) te vemos los calzoncillos.
Pull up your jeans because we can see your shorts.
The pronouns are placed in brackets, because you don't need them, but I wanted to emphasize the person and the change in conjugation.

Sorry for the delay.

[Nfqufktc]

Thank you, AngelicaDeAlquezar. Your explanation is most sincerely appreciated.