Práctica

[Fazor]

Ese es un hilo para práctica. De vez en cuando, hay un hilo sobre algo que necesito practicar. En lugar de uso los hilos por mi práctica, uso ese hilo. No quiero estar una distracción en los hilos original.

Hoy hay un hilo sobre "Direct and Indirect Objects". Me lo gusto. Tengo problemas con los y necesito practicar.

Me gusta mi coche. No lo usa mucho gas.
Visito a Tomísimo.com todos los días. Lo está muy servicial.
Mis padres compraron chocolates para mi sobrina. Ellos se los dieron en domingo.
Mi novia trabaja a Olive Garden. Me gusta la comida. Algunas veces ella me lo compra cuando ella trabaja.

[Rusty]

Originally Posted by Fazor

Este es un hilo de práctica (para mí). De vez en cuando, pondré un mensaje sobre algo que necesito practicar. En lugar de usar los hilos ajenos para mi practicar, usaré este hilo. No quiero distraer la atención en los hilos originales.

Hoy hay un hilo sobre "Direct and Indirect Objects". Me lo gustó. Tengo problemas con ellos y necesito practicarlos.

Me gusta mi coche. No lo usa mucha gasolina.
Visito a Tomísimo.com todos los días. Lo está muy servicial. (Me ayuda mucho. - Me sirve bien.)
Mis padres compraron chocolates para mi sobrina. Ellos se los dieron el domingo.
Mi novia trabaja en Olive Garden. Me gusta la comida. Algunas veces ella me la compra cuando ella trabaja.

Corrections/suggestions above.
The first two practice sentences are using the English word it. This is a subject pronoun, not a direct object pronoun. The subject pronoun is frequently omitted because it is understood. If you must voice the word it, the pronoun to use depends on the gender of the subject it is replacing (use él, ella or ello).
You correctly used the indirect and direct objects in the third sentence. Your fourth sentence also had both types of objects, but the direct object pronoun didn't match gender of the object it was replacing (la comida).

There is another class of object pronouns besides the two mentioned in the other thread - the prepositional pronouns. These are found in prepositional phrases, as objects of the preposition. There is a prepositional pronoun in the phrase 'Tengo problemas con ellos', for example.
The prepositional pronouns are mí, ti, él/ella/ello/usted, nosotros, vosotros, and ellos/ellas/ustedes.
Caution! The preposition con employs three irregular prepositional pronouns:
conmigo instead of con mí
contigo instead of con ti
consigo instead of con él/ella/usted mismo/a and con ellos/ellas/ustedes mismos/as

[Fazor]

Lo está muy servicial. (Me ayuda mucho. - Me sirve bien.)

En 'Me sirve bien', 'me' es un pronombre indirecto, ¿Verdad?

There is a prepositional pronoun in the phrase 'Tengo problemas con ellos', for example. . . . Caution! The preposition con employs three irregular prepositional pronouns: . . .

Tengo problemas consigo.

[CrOtALiTo]

Está muy servicial. (Me ayuda mucho. - Me sirve bien.)

En 'Me sirve bien', 'me' es un pronombre indirecto, ¿Verdad?

Quote:
There is a prepositional pronoun in the phrase 'Tengo problemas con ellos', for example. . . . Caution! The preposition con employs three irregular prepositional pronouns: . . .
Tengo problemas consigo.

The word that you wrote was bad wrote, therefore I made a bit corrections in your post.

I hope you can understand me.

[Rusty]

Indirect object pronoun = pronombre de complemento indirecto
Direct object pronoun = pronombre de complemento directo
object pronouns = pronombres complementarios

Originally Posted by Fazor

En 'Me sirve bien', 'me' es un pronombre indirecto, ¿Verdad?

Short answer, yes. Me es un pronombre de complemento indirecto.
Servir can be used as both a transitive and an intransitive verb.

Transitive verbs take an object (indirect and/or direct). Used as a transitive verb, servir can take a direct object (servir la comida), an indirect object (servir a la familia) or both (servir la comida a la familia). In this sense, the English verb serve is the translation.

The way I used it, however, it is classified as an intransitive verb. It takes no object. The English translation is to be useful. The me is an indirect object pronoun, but it really doesn't function like as an indirect recipient of the action of the verb (there is no recipient of the action, either). Think about the English sentence "It is useful.' There is no object. We can add 'to me' or 'for digging a hole' to expand upon it. This construction is much like me gusta (it is pleasing to me). The verb is intransitive; "It is pleasing" can stand on its own.

Originally Posted by Fazor

Tengo problemas consigo.

I have problems with it = Tengo problemas con él/ella/ello.
Do I have problems with it (the sentence)? = ¿Tengo problemas con ella?

Consigo, as I tried to explain above, is used reflexively (mismo means self). If the English pronoun were itself (himself, herself, yourself), consigo would be the correct translation.

[Fazor]

Originally Posted by Rusty

Consigo, as I tried to explain above, is used reflexively (mismo means self). If the English pronoun were itself (himself, herself, yourself), consigo would be the correct translation.

El vio un película ayer. Fue consigo.
No me necesitas. Puedes hacer contigo.

[Rusty]

Originally Posted by Fazor

El vió una película ayer. Fue consigo.
No me necesitas. Puedes hacer contigo.

Neither sentence that contains con makes any sense. What are you trying to say?

[Fazor]

I'm good at not making sense (no seriously, that's how my sense of humor is).

But in these cases, I was trying to say "He watched a movie yesterday. He went by himself." and "You don't need me. You can do it yourself."

[poli]

Originally Posted by Fazor

I'm good at not making sense (no seriously, that's how my sense of humor is).

But in these cases, I was trying to say "He watched a movie yesterday. He went by himself." and "You don't need me. You can do it yourself."

Fue solo al cine ayer a ver una película.
Vio la película solo.

[Rusty]

You don't need me. You can do it yourself.
= No me necesitas. Puedes hacerlo tú mismo.
= No me necesita. Puede hacerlo usted mismo.

He brought his jacket (with himself).
= Él llevó la chaqueta consigo.

[Fazor]

Originally Posted by Rusty

He brought his jacket (with himself).
= Él llevó la chaqueta consigo.

Ah, that might be what threw me off. In a sentence like that, I'd just say "He brought his jacket with him" even though "with himself" may be the grammatically correct way to say it.

[Rusty]

I wrote it in parentheses because it isn't grammatically correct in English. I was trying to drive home the reflexivity of consigo. "He brought his jacket," or "He brought his jacket with him" is English.

[Fazor]

Veí el hilo de "Conditional Tense" hoy. Yo no lo estudiaba nunca.

Yo pescaría, pero necesito trabajar hoy.
Ellos ganaría anoche, pero no veí el partido.
Sería buen si yo escribo un libro.

[Rusty]

Originally Posted by Fazor

Vi el hilo sobre el "Conditional Tense" hoy. (Yo) No lo estudié nunca. -o- Nunca lo estudié.

Yo pescaría, pero necesito trabajar hoy.
-o- Me gustaría/encantaría pescar hoy, pero tengo que trabajar.
Ellos ganaría anoche, pero no vi el partido. Are you trying to say 'they should have won last night' or 'they would have won last night'?
Sería bueno si yo escribiera un libro.

The conditional tense will often require the use of the imperfect subjunctive mood in the dependent clause, as in the last sentence you wrote.

[Fazor]

Ellos ganaría anoche, pero no vi el partido. Are you trying to say 'they should have won last night' or 'they would have won last night'?

"They may have/could have won last night, but I didn't watch the game."

And thanks, I was wondering about the subjunctive mood because it seemed like they'd be pretty closely related.

Originally Posted by Fazor

"They may have/could have won last night, but I didn't watch the game."

Now that I think about that, that's subjunctive rather than conditional, no?

Si ellos ganaría anoche, aventajaran los otrós equipos.
Is that a better example?

[Rusty]

Originally Posted by Fazor

"They may have/could have won last night, but I didn't watch the game."

Si ellos ganaría anoche, aventajaran los otrós equipos.
Is that a better example?

What you want to say is:
Si hubieran ganado anoche, aventajarían los otros equipos.

Don't forget to use los tiempos compuestos (compound tenses - present perfect, past perfect), like haber ganado. There is an auxiliary have (haber), followed by the past participle.

The sentence I wrote contains haber ganado conjugated in the subjunctive mood of the pretérito pluscuamperfecto tense in the dependent clause, and the conditional tense in the main clause.

[Fazor]

Ah yes, the good 'ol pretérito pluscamperfecto tense. I'm very familiar with that . . . but do you mind explaining it in case someone else has no idea what that is?

I'll have to go look up compound tenses. We never covered that in class (and by that, I mean we probably covered it but I didn't pay attention).

[Rusty]

It's the past perfect (or pluperfect) tense, formed with the auxiliary verb had, plus the past participle. Some English examples:
I had seen the movie.
The flower had withered in the dry desert heat.

In Spanish, it is formed with the imperfect past tense auxiliary verb había and the past participle. In Spanish, here is the first sentence from the examples above, in the indicative mood, followed by the subjunctive mood:
Había visto la película.
Hubiera visto la película. -o- Hubiese visto la película.

[Fazor]

Un otro fin de semana. No creo que hago. Necesito trabajar en mi patio. Quiero jugar al golf o béisbol. Quiero pescar tambien.

Aprendo un canción nuevo para guitarra. Es 'Man of Steel' de Frank Black, y es relativemente facil.

[Rusty]

Originally Posted by Fazor

Otro fin de semana y no sé que hacer. Necesito trabajar en mi patio. Quiero jugar al golf o al béisbol. Quiero pescar también.

Aprendo una canción nueva para la guitarra. Es 'Man of Steel' de Frank Black, y es relativamente fácil.

Corrections above. (I think I guessed what your original second sentence was supposed to be. )