The unstressed and the stressed forms of the indirect object pronoun with “comprar” a

[Nfqufktc]

In this exercise the task is to translate a command from English into Spanish:

Command 1. Buy the doll for her. Buy it for her. [Uds.]

The key has Cómprenle la muñeca. Cómprensela.

I would appreciate it it you could clarify if the answer Compren la muñeca para ella is unacceptable because the rule is that “the indirect object pronoun (unstressed form) must always be present when the indirect object (included or left out) refers to specific persons.”
As a sidenote the chapter in the grammar only deals with the prepositions “para” and “a”.

Likewise,
Le mostramos la nueva zapatería a mi amiga. Ella mira los zapatos de tacón, pero no nos los compra.
Ella mira los zapatos de tacón, pero no los compra para nosotros.
We show the new shoe store to my friend. She looks at the high heels but she doesn’t buy them for us.

Command 2. Speak to the manager.

a) Am I to assume that it is the contintental usage vs. the Latin American usage? The entry in the dictionaries has “con” only.
hablar con algn de algo vs. hablar a algn de algo
speak with sb about sth/ to talk to sb about sth

b) The key has ¡Háblele Ud. al gerente / encargado / a la gerente / encargada! Speak to the manager! [Ud. is the subject]

This sentence is with “con” so I don’t know if it’s ok.
¡Háblele Ud. con el gerente / encargado / con la gerente / encargada! = Speak to the manager!

¡Háble Ud. con el gerente / encargado / con la gerente / encargada! is unacceptable because the unstressed form must be used with the indirect object added to refer to a specific person.

But I have this examle from a dictionary:
Puedes hablar conmigo cuando quieras. (persons are specific and no “me”)
You can speak to me whenever you want.

And this example:
Me puedes hablar de tú.
You may address me as “tú”.

Would it be acceptable to modify the above examples like this:
Me puedes hablar cuando quieras.
Puedes hablar conmigo de tú. This sentence is unacceptable because it contradicts to the rule above.

3. Also, I have this example among my notes. I think I copied it from some grammar.

Durante la semana, les hablo por teléfono.
Durante la semana, hablo con ellos por teléfono.
During the week I speak with them on the phone.
It claims that both ways are possible.

Would you throw light upon this subject?

Thank you.

[AngelicaDeAlquezar]

Originally Posted by Nfqufktc

Command 1. Buy the doll for her. Buy it for her. [Uds.]

The key has Cómprenle la muñeca. Cómprensela.

"Compren la muñeca para ella" is correct in a context where you would have to clarify for whom the doll will be bought.
But here, you're being asked to use the indirect object, so only "le" is correct. The indirect object pronoun is used to replace the person or thing for whom something is done (that's why your examples are with "a" and "para").

We say "Cómprenle la muñeca", because the direct object is explicit, so it is not replaced by a pronoun.
When you translate: "Cómprensela", the direct object is already known, so we use the direct object pronoun "la", and then we have to change "le" for "se" because both pronouns can't go together as "lela".

Originally Posted by Nfqufktc

Le mostramos la nueva zapatería a mi amiga. Ella mira los zapatos de tacón, pero no nos los compra.
Ella mira los zapatos de tacón, pero no los compra para nosotros.
We show the new shoe store to my friend. She looks at the high heels but she doesn’t buy them for us.

So, we use "no nos los compra", because both, indirect object and direct object are known, so the pronouns do the job of replacing "(a/para) nosotros" and "los zapatos de tacón".
When you say "pero no los compra para nosotros", the situation may be that she's buying the shoes for herself or for someone else, but not for us, and such thing would have to be clarified.

Originally Posted by Nfqufktc

Speak to the manager.

a) Am I to assume that it is the contintental usage vs. the Latin American usage? The entry in the dictionaries has “con” only.
hablar con algn de algo vs. hablar a algn de algo
speak with sb about sth/ to talk to sb about sth

b) The key has ¡Háblele Ud. al gerente / encargado / a la gerente / encargada! Speak to the manager! [Ud. is the subject]

This sentence is with “con” so I don’t know if it’s ok.
¡Háblele Ud. con el gerente / encargado / con la gerente / encargada! = Speak to the manager!

If someone tells you: "Háblele (usted) con el gerente" this means that you and the manager have to talk to a third person, already known to the speaker, which is not the case in your example. "Hablar" can only be accompanied by an indirect object (like "le"/"les") or a prepositional complement like "con". It's only one or the other.
And a little complication here is that common usage in Latin America needs a redundant indirect object pronoun together with the explicit indirect object: "háblele al gerente".
You could simply say "hable al gerente", but I think that's a more common usage in Spain. In Mexico we use this redundant form all the time.
- Dile a mi mamá que venga.
- Cómprale al perro un juguete.
- Llévales dulces a los niños.

Originally Posted by Nfqufktc

¡Hable Ud. con el gerente / encargado / con la gerente / encargada! is unacceptable because the unstressed form must be used with the indirect object added to refer to a specific person.

Correct. If you add a pronoun, the situation would have to be very specific, as I said before. And if there is no third person involved, it's only "le" or "con".

Originally Posted by Nfqufktc

But I have this examle from a dictionary:
Puedes hablar conmigo cuando quieras. (persons are specific and no “me”)
You can speak to me whenever you want.

And this example:
Me puedes hablar de tú.
You may address me as “tú”.

Would it be acceptable to modify the above examples like this:
Me puedes hablar cuando quieras.
Puedes hablar conmigo de tú. This sentence is unacceptable because it contradicts to the rule above.

When "hablar" means "to communicate with words", it doesn't need any complements like "con" or "a".
"Me" is the normal indirect object pronoun, which works exactly like "le".
- Me habló el médico. (A mí)
- Te hablo mañana. (A tí)
- Le/les hablaremos de esto. (A ella/ellas-él/ellos)
- Nadie nos habla. (A nosotros)

If you say "hablar con", "conmigo"/"contigo" is used instead of "con mí" or "con ti", which are incorrect.
- Hablaron conmigo.
- Quiero hablar contigo.
- Nunca hablan con él/ella/ellos/ellas.

"Puedes hablar conmigo de tú" is a bit clumsy as a sentence, because if you're asking for an informal treatment, it already implies that we both are communicating.

Originally Posted by Nfqufktc

3. Also, I have this example among my notes. I think I copied it from some grammar.

Durante la semana, les hablo por teléfono.
Durante la semana, hablo con ellos por teléfono.
During the week I speak with them on the phone.
It claims that both ways are possible.

I think both ways are correct:
"Hablar por teléfono" can be an action perceived as a one person initiative (the person who calls on the phone decides to do it; besides "hablar a alguien" sometimes means that only one person speaks), and also the idea of talking on the phone is that both ends of the line will have a conversation, so that's why both formulas can be correct.
- Habló conmigo por teléfono Me habló por teléfono.
There's a little nuance in meaning, but both sentences are more or less the same for me:
That person called me and we had a conversation The initiative of calling me was from the other person and what was said was mostly what they wanted to talk about.

I hope explanations were clear, but ask any questions you need.

[Nfqufktc]

AngelicaDeAlquezar, thank you very much for the detailed explanation and the effort to lay it out in an easy-to-understand way.
Allow me to go over some of the points you've made to solidify my understanding.

1. With the indirect object the preposition a is used to express the dative case relationship.
With the indirect object the preposition para is used to express the dative/gentive case relationship (purpose/destination).
The prepositions are not exactly interchangeable.
Lo explicas para Eva.= Se lo explicas (a ella).
You explain / are explaining it to Eve. = You explain / are explaining it to her.
Trajeron los libros para los estudiantes. = Se los trajeron (a ellos).
They brought the books to the students. = They brought the students the books.

Along the same line,
In the sentence ¡Compren la muñeca para ella! = ¡Cómprenle la muñeca! = ¡Cómprensela!
Buy the doll for her! Buy her the doll! Buy it for her! Buy her it!

Joana compró unos pasteles para la niña.
Jane bought some pastry for the girl.
Joana se los compró.
Jane bought them for her.

But in this example:

Juana le compró unos pasteles para la niña.
Jane bought (from him) some pastry for the girl.
Juana le compró (al hombre) unos pasteles para la niña.
Jane bought (from the man) some pastry for the girl.
Juana se los compró para la niña.
Jane bought them from him for the girl.
Am I to understand that the preposition para is no longer used in the indirect object relationship but rather in a adverbial object relationship?

2. Am I to understand that the sentence "Háblele (usted) con el gerente" means You are to speak with him with the manager being present?
Háblele (a él) usted con el gerente?

3. Based on your explanation I would venture a guess that "hablar con algn" implies a 50% to 50% sharing in an act of communication while "hablarle a algn" may mean the whole act of communication dominated by the initiator

• hablarle a algn (de algo)

¡Háblele Ud. al jefe! Speak to the boss!
¡Háblame! Speak to me! [tú]
Déjame hablar a mí. Let me do the talking.

• hablar con algn

Necesito hablar contigo. I need to talk / speak to you. We need to talk.
Hablé con ella ayer por la noche. I spoke to her last night. I had a talk with her last night.

4. Would it be ok to include "you" (2pers. sg/pl formal) in the paradigm?

Me habló el médico. (A mí) The doctor spoke to me/ the doctor had a talk with me. (the subject at the end is a bit misleading)
Te hablo mañana. (A tí) I'll talk to you tomorrow.

Le hablaremos de esto (a él). We will speak with / talk to him about it.
Le hablaremos de esto (a ella). We will speak with / talk to her about it.
Le hablaremos de esto (a Ud.). We will speak with / talk to you (2pers. sg. formal) about it.
Les hablaremos de esto (a ellos). We will speak with / talk to them (masc.pl) about it.
Les hablaremos de esto (a ellas). We will speak with / talk to them (fem.pl) about it.
Les hablaremos de esto (a Uds.). We will speak with / talk to you (2pers. pl. formal) about it.

Nadie nos habla. (A nosotros) Nobody speaks with us / talks to us.

[AngelicaDeAlquezar]

Originally Posted by Nfqufktc

Am I to understand that the preposition para is no longer used in the indirect object relationship but rather in a adverbial object relationship?

I've been reading about this, and I found something interesting:
According to my grammar book, although the indirect complement introduced by the preposition "para" is compatible with the indirect object pronouns, strictly speaking the indirect object can only be introduced by the preposition "a"; not "para".
That is why we can't use the redundant pronoun in "Joana le compró unos pasteles para la niña" the same way as "le compró pasteles a la niña".
In the first sentence, "le" and "para la niña" are an indirect object and a complement compatible with a direct object that can't refer to the same person, while in the second sentence the preposition "a" clearly introduces an indirect object and thus the pronoun refers to the same person (that's why we say it's redundant).
And this is also why you must change the preposition in
"Lo explicas para Eva." "Se lo explicas a ella."
because "se lo explicas para ella" wouldn't make sense.

In your examples, your indirect object, to be considered an actual indirect object, it should always be introduced by the preposition "a"*:
- (Se) Lo explicas a Eva. -> Se lo explicas.
- (Les) Trajeron libros a los estudiantes. -> Se los trajeron
- ¡Cómprenle la muñeca a ella! -> ¡Cómprensela!
- Joana le compró unos pasteles a la niña. -> Se los compró.


*·Direct object
· Indirect object
· Redundant pronoun for indirect object -> I'm putting these in parentheses because you can use them or not. In Mexico, a sentence like these without them feels incorrect, although it is not. I think it's mostly in Spain where they rarely use them.

Originally Posted by Nfqufktc

2. Am I to understand that the sentence "Háblele (usted) con el gerente" means You are to speak with him with the manager being present?
Háblele (a él) usted con el gerente?

When we use "hablar", the person to whom we're speaking is the indirect object, but when we introduce the preposition "con", then we are using a prepositional complement; this is why we do not replace the person with an indirect object pronoun:
- "Habla conmigo" is not exactly the same as "háblame". In the first case, I'm offering a conversation partner, and in the other I might just be asking you to call me on the phone, or offering a less enthusiastic conversation partner.
- Hable con el gerente -> Go and ask the manager to listen to you.
- Háblele con el gerente -> Since "con" does not introduce an indirect object, the pronoun and the person in the prepositional complement are not the same. This would mean that both, the client and the manager will talk to someone else about the client's problem.

Originally Posted by Nfqufktc

3. Based on your explanation I would venture a guess that "hablar con algn" implies a 50% to 50% sharing in an act of communication while "hablarle a algn" may mean the whole act of communication dominated by the initiator

I think it's mostly a subtle nuance in the back of the mind of the speaker, but it's useful to keep it in mind.

Hablar a alguien:
- ¡Háblele Ud. al jefe! Speak to the boss!
- ¡Háblame! Speak to me! [tú]

Déjame hablar a mí. Let me do the talking. -> This sentence is different, because there is no indirect object here, but a direct object, related to "dejar", not to "hablar". Remember that when using "hablar", the indirect object is the person to whom we're talking to, and here the direct object will be the one talking.

Hablar con alguien:
- Necesito hablar contigo. I need to talk / speak to you.
- Hablé con ella ayer por la noche. I spoke to her last night. I had a talk with her last night.

Tenemos que hablar. -> We need to talk. -> This is how we say it.

Originally Posted by Nfqufktc

4. Would it be ok to include "you" (2pers. sg/pl formal) in the paradigm?

In general, it's only necessary to add "a + person" when there's need to make explicit whom we're talking about; when your listener doesn't know or when you must clarify. I added those pronouns to connect the indirect object pronoun with the personal pronouns, because "le"/"les" usually gives an impression that the indirect object only works for third persons.

- "Me habló el médico a mí" is unnecessary, unless we have to stress the fact that it was me, and no one else, the person the doctor talked to. So, we just say "Me habló el médico".

- "Te hablo mañana a ti" -> This doesn't really make sense, but if the speaker makes it explicit like this, they mean that they will call you, even if they could call someone else, but it's going to be you. You can't escape.

- Le hablaremos de esto a él/ella/usted. -> There might be more than one situation where we would have to add the person, because of the ambiguity of several persons using the same indirect object pronoun. Same in plural.
For example:
- El doctor dijo que Mary está bien. Le hablaremos de esto. -> Whom are we talking to about this, the doctor or Mary? We then would have to clarify "le hablaremos de esto al doctor" or "le hablaremos de esto a Mary".

- Nadie nos habla a nosotros. -> This is a sad thing. They talk to anyone else, but we're being ignored.

Keep asking questions until it's clearer. This is a difficult topic.

[Nfqufktc]

Thank you, AngelicaDeAlquezar.

[Nfqufktc]

Would you check my understanding with regard to the following:

1.
a. To express the indirect object relationship: the unstressed indirect object pronoun les + the clarifier (the preposition a + indirect object noun) (clarifier to be used to express explicitly whom smth is done for)

to bring sth for sb (Les trajeron los libros a los estudiantes)
b. The preposition para is to be used to specifically express whom something is done for.

I cannot fail but notice there is a certain parallelism between the two constructions (use of clarifier vs. para)

It was wrong of me to equate the sentences in my samples.

"Compren la muñeca para ella" - recipient specifically expressed
"Cómprenle la muñeca a ella" - indirect object relationship routinely expressed

2.

A) indirect object relationship:
Háblele Ud. al gerente.
Speak to the manager. (That's why he is here for and he WILL listen to your plea (will offer himself as /will act as a good listener)

B) prepositional complement
Hable con el gerente
Go and ask the manager to listen to you (try to get him interested in what you have to say so hopefully he'll have a conversation with you about your problem)

C) indirect object relationship + complex subject?
Háblele usted con el gerente.
When I was studying your explanation I had an idea that it might be part of a complex subject but I discarded it as in that case it would've had nothing to do with the verb hablar. Was my hunch correct? Like "my father and I"?

You, together with the manager, go and talk to him (third party).
You and the manager, go and talk to him (third party).

3.
Will you check my analysis of 'dejar(le) a alguien hacer algo' so I won't make a blunder like that again?
Déjame hablar a mí
This sentence is in the imperative. The implied subject is tú. me is the direct object (Will you allow whom?) and hablar is the infinitive complement. I would venture an guess that 'me hablar' serves as an infinitive clause with me acting like a subject. The stressed form a mí is used emphaticallly.

Thank you.