dársela a algn

[Nfqufktc]

¡Hola!
Would have a look at my analysis of this phrase and tell me where I am wrong?
I checked the examples in several dictionaries and there is no "te" in either of them. Would you point out the flaw in my line of reasoning?


By the way, am I correct to say that "la" means "it" or "this thing"?



Thank you.

[aleCcowaN]

Because the "la" in "dársela" is a lexicalized pronoun, that is, something functional to the verb meaning and totally unrelated with subject, objects and the like.

Like pasarla bien, dársela de culto, etc.

For instance, I never heard of "dársela al marido con el vecino". In fact, it sounds kind of menageatroish to me. So I automatically think la is related to the meaning

The same way, if I use the Argentinian idiom "ponerle el pecho a las balas" most will deduce "le" relates to the meaning and not to the "balas". A few native Spanish speaking foreigners will think I don't know how to use pronouns.

[Nfqufktc]

Thank you. The question with “la” is clear.


I would appreciate it if you could clarify the first part.


I made a mistake in the drawing. Both the verb and the reflexive pronoun must be in agreement with the subject “tú”. I made the wrong connections.

I am not sure if a sentence may have three pronouns in a row but the reflexive nature of the verb must be expressed in some way.

Here is another example without the reflexive object pronoun “te”

dársela a algn
Tiene buenos modales y cara de inocente, pero a mí no me la da.
She's well-mannered and has an innocent face, but she can't fool me.

But, on the other hand, this example has the reflexive object pronoun:

¿y a mí qué se me da de todo esto?
what does all that matter to me?

Would you clarify this?

[aleCcowaN]

dársela a alguien

there's the agent who "la da" and the recipient of the action (alguien)

A mí no me la das

includes the agent ([tú] la das), and the recipient (me)

No me la das.

As Spanish hates redundancy but hates ambiguity and lack of clarity even more

A mí no me la das

I think the te you're looking for is the se in the definition

dársela a alguien
dártela a ti
darnosla a todos.

Remember that such se hides a real le, as in "se lo dijo" which really means "le lo dijo". In the same way "dársela a alguien" means "dárlela* a alguien"

That le (and me, te and nos) became a se for phonetic reasons so many centuries ago that no native speaker realises nor gives a darn, but for students so analytical as yourself it may pose a problem.

Am I in the right track? Feel free to tell me I completely misunderstood your requirements. It won't offend me, and I'll be glad to try again.

[Rusty]

This makes everything crystal clear to me! (You're on the right track. )

[poli]

Just one more clarification for me, as linguistic fine points sometime confuse me: would it make sense to say a nosotros no nos la damos?

[aleCcowaN]

Originally Posted by poli

Just one more clarification for me, as linguistic fine points sometime confuse me: would it make sense to say a nosotros no nos la damos?

I'm not familiar with that verbal use, but that "a" makes little sense to me as "darla" I feel is like stabbing someone in the back figuratively.

[Nfqufktc]

I was aware of the “se”-“le” conversion but only as applied to the ditransitive relationship(le doy (a él) un libro? se lo doy). What you have managed to point out in your explanation is that the REFLEXIVE PRONOUN FUNCTIONS AS THE INDIRECT OBJECT. Thank you.

Would you look at the paradigm of “Hacérselo” and tell me if it is ok?

[Nfqufktc]

I was aware of the “se”-“le” conversion but only as applied to the ditransitive relationship(le doy (a él) un libro - se lo doy). What you have managed to point out in your explanation is that the REFLEXIVE PRONOUN FUNCTIONS AS THE INDIRECT OBJECT. Thank you.

Would you look at the paradigm of “Hacérselo” and tell me if it is ok?

[Nfqufktc]

Apart from the pattern “dársela a algn” with the direct object (conditionally “disguised reflexive”)




There seems to be another pattern “dársele a algn” with the indirect object (conditionally “undisguised reflexive”)





The reflexive “se” connects with “los idiomas”.

Would you confirm my understanding that “qué” and “nada” are the subjects and the translation is misleading?


Thank you.

[Nfqufktc]

Would you advise as to how should I proceed with regard to the following:


I am working now on a reading comprehension text. There are a couple of points I would appreciate your giving me your opinion upon. May I post a text in Spanish (it is about a page long) for referential purposes only (so an expert could get a better understanding of the grammatical and lexical landscape)?

[Nfqufktc]

I have noticed that I doubled one of the posts but for some reason the the edit/delete button is not working. I have informed the webmaster. I am sorry for the any inconvenience.

[aleCcowaN]

Originally Posted by Nfqufktc

I was aware of the “se”-“le” conversion but only as applied to the ditransitive relationship(le doy (a él) un libro - se lo doy). What you have managed to point out in your explanation is that the REFLEXIVE PRONOUN FUNCTIONS AS THE INDIRECT OBJECT. Thank you.

Would you look at the paradigm of “Hacérselo” and tell me if it is ok?

(Yo) me lo hice a mí mismo/a

(Tú/Vos) te lo hiciste a ti/vos mismo/a

(Ud) se lo hizo a usted mismo/a

(Él/Ella) se lo hizo a sí mismo/a

(Nosotros/as) nos lo hicimos a nosotros/as mismos/as

(Vosotros/as) os lo hicisteis a vosotros/as mismos/as

(Uds) se lo hicieron a ustedes mismos/as

(Ellos/as) se lo hicieron a sí mismos/as

[aleCcowaN]

The first one kind of sounds logical to me, but in my country we don't use such expression.

I cannot confirm the second phrase exists as it is traslated. To me it is equivalent to

Soy un negado para todo esto. (= nada de eso se me da fácilmente)

[aleCcowaN]

Originally Posted by Nfqufktc

Would you advise as to how should I proceed with regard to the following:


I am working now on a reading comprehension text. There are a couple of points I would appreciate your giving me your opinion upon. May I post a text in Spanish (it is about a page long) for referential purposes only (so an expert could get a better understanding of the grammatical and lexical landscape)?

Open a new thread for each question and quote the text. Take into account that long chunks of text may imply copyright infringement, so keep them short (a third of a page, tops) or better link them externally.

Don't add new elements to this thread, no matter they seem related, but start new ones, as many as necessary.