Hola a todos

Porque siempre en español se usan el prenombre indirecto con el objeto indirecto en la misma frase, por ejemplo:

Se la di a la secretaria.

Le escribí a Juan.

Encontré tambien esta frase:

Ellas son mas propensas a robarle el novio a las amigas.

A que se refiere este prenombre. ¿Es correcto se dice Ellas son mas propensas a robar el novio a las amigas?

Saludos.
1 2
Hola!

Se la di a la secretaria.=She/he gave it to the secretary. En este case se reemeplaza la "le" con "se." le la/lo/los/las=Se la/se lo/se los/se las

Le escribí a Juan.=I wrote to Juan

Ellas son mas propensas a robarle el novio a las amigas. No pienso que esta frase sea correcto. Pienso que lo correcto seria "Ellas son mas propenas a robarles el novio a ellas.=They are more prone to steal their boyfriend from their friends.

Espero haberte ayudado.

A ver que dicen los nativos.

Saludos
My question is: in the 1st sentence the indirect object is there "la secretaria". So why put the prounoun se, which is originally le?

In the 2nd sentence, why don't we say escribí a Juan.

I do understand the concept of redunduncy in spanish where we say Le escribí a él. But as i understood it this only applies when you refer to the indirect object with a él. In this case the use of the initial pronoun is mandatory. However, in the sentence Le escribí a Juan, the indirect object is clearly stated.
You can't say "Le la di a la secretaria" so you say "Se la dio a la secretaria."

You can say escribi a Juan, but le escribi a Juan is better. The le refers to a Juan, so it sounds better to say Le escribi a Juan=I wrote to Juan

I wrote it to Juan=Se lo/la escribi a Juan

I hope this helps

Saludos
You can't say "Le la di a la secretaria" so you say "Se la di a la secretaria." It is a rule. The le is replaced by the se. In this case the se is not a reflexive pronoun.

You can say escribi a Juan, but le escribi a Juan is better. The le refers to a Juan, so it sounds better to say Le escribi a Juan=I wrote to Juan

I wrote it to Juan=Se lo/la escribi a Juan

Porque siempre en español se usan el prenombre indirecto con el objeto indirecto en la misma frase=¿Por qué en español siempre se usa el pronombre indirecto con el ojeto indirecto en la misa frase?

I hope this helps

Saludos
Thanks Carolina, my question regarding the 1st sentence was can we say "la di a la secretaria" without se. I don't have a problem w/ se replacing le or les.

But judging from your answer to my other sentence. It sounds better to use it but its not mandatory, right?

Saludos
la di a la secretaria=I gave it to the secretary

Se la di a la secretaria-I gave it to the secretary. This one is more correct.

But judging from your answer to my other sentence. It sounds better to use it but its not mandatory, right? Yes, and sometimes it's more common in writing to use the se.

I hope this helps

Saludos
CarolinaHola!

Se la di a la secretaria.=She/he gave it to the secretary. En este case se reemeplaza la "le" con "se." le la/lo/los/las=Se la/se lo/se los/se las

Le escribí a Juan.=I wrote to Juan

Ellas son mas propensas a robarle el novio a las amigas. No pienso que esta frase sea correcto. Pienso que lo correcto seria "Ellas son mas propenas a robarles el novio a ellas.=They are more prone to steal their boyfriend from their friends.

Espero haberte ayudado.

A ver que dicen los nativos.

Saludos
in the sentence "Ellas son mas propensas a robarles el novio a ellas" the stolen object was el novio and it's singular, so "robarle " is correct, for example
"Ellas son mas propensas a robarles los novios a ellas" robarles los novios
" ... this only applies when you refer to the indirect object with a el..... However, in ... Le escribi a Juan, the indirect object is clearly stated"

Not true that it only applies when you refer to the indirect object with "a el".

It doesn't matter what the corresponding "a ..." phrase is. Even though it's redundant, the 'le' (or its equivalent 'les' or 'se', as appropriate) is always included when the sentence contains any kind of indirect object.

Consider that 'a la secretaria' can be either a direct object or an indirect object (because of the use of personal 'a' in the case of the direct object). So the presence of 'le' helps guide the listener to the indirect object interpretation of 'a la secretaria'.

The 'le' element may be omitted if you want to create distance, as in a very formal business letter. But otherwise, it's best to keep the 'le' in all cases.

Jim
Mostrar más